Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 1 of 33
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`E-NUMERATE SOLUTIONS, INC. and
`E-NUMERATE, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`THE UNITED STATES,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 19-859 C
`
`Judge Ryan T. Holte
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Pursuant to Rules 8 and 12 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, the
`
`
`
`
`United States (“Defendant”) hereby answers the allegations made in each of the numbered
`
`paragraphs of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint filed on April 27, 2021. Each numbered
`
`paragraph 1 to 179 below responds to the corresponding numbered paragraph of the Second
`
`Amended Complaint. Upon current information and belief, all allegations of the Second
`
`Amended Complaint are denied except to the extent expressly admitted below.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 1 are a plaintiff’s characterizations of itself, to which
`
`no response is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that Plaintiff e-Numerate
`
`Solutions, Inc. (“ESI”) is named as a plaintiff in this action, and that the online business entity
`
`database of the State of Delaware identifies “E-NUMERATE SOLUTIONS INCORPORATED”
`
`as a corporation. Defendant denies the remainder of the allegations for lack of knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.
`
`2.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 2 are a plaintiff’s characterizations of itself, to which
`
`no response is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that Plaintiff e-Numerate,
`
`-1-
`
`
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`E-NUMERATE SOLUTIONS, INC. and
`E-NUMERATE, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`THE UNITED STATES,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 19-859 C
`
`Judge Ryan T. Holte
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Pursuant to Rules 8 and 12 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, the
`
`
`
`
`United States (“Defendant”) hereby answers the allegations made in each of the numbered
`
`paragraphs of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint filed on April 27, 2021. Each numbered
`
`paragraph 1 to 179 below responds to the corresponding numbered paragraph of the Second
`
`Amended Complaint. Upon current information and belief, all allegations of the Second
`
`Amended Complaint are denied except to the extent expressly admitted below.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 1 are a plaintiff’s characterizations of itself, to which
`
`no response is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that Plaintiff e-Numerate
`
`Solutions, Inc. (“ESI”) is named as a plaintiff in this action, and that the online business entity
`
`database of the State of Delaware identifies “E-NUMERATE SOLUTIONS INCORPORATED”
`
`as a corporation. Defendant denies the remainder of the allegations for lack of knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.
`
`2.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 2 are a plaintiff’s characterizations of itself, to which
`
`no response is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that Plaintiff e-Numerate,
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 2 of 33
`
`LLC is named as a plaintiff in this action, and that the online business entity database of the State
`
`of Delaware identifies “ENUMERATE, LLC” as a limited liability company. Defendant denies
`
`the remainder of the allegations for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
`
`as to their truth.
`
`3.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 3 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that the first page of each of the
`
`“Asserted Patents” identifies “e-Numerate Solutions, Inc.” as “Assignee.” Defendant denies the
`
`remainder of the allegations for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`their truth.
`
`4.
`
`With respect to paragraph 4 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`5.
`
`With respect to paragraph 5 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that Plaintiffs have identified the United States as the Defendant, and that the U.S.
`
`Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
`
`(“FDIC”), the Federal Financial Institutions Examining Council (“FFIEC”), the United States
`
`Department of the Treasury (“USDOT”), the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), the
`
`Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) and the United States Department of Energy
`
`(“DOE”) are agencies of the United States. Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`ALLEGED JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 6 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that 35 U.S.C. § 271 provides a
`
`cause of action for patent infringement against private parties, but denies that it provides a cause
`
`of action against the United States. Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 3 of 33
`
`7.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 7 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits that 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)
`
`confers jurisdiction with the United States Court of Federal Claims. Defendant denies any
`
`remaining allegations.
`
`ALLEGED PRIOR LITIGATION INVOLVING THE ‘355, ‘816, ‘383 AND ‘748
`PATENTS
`
`8.
`
`Defendant admits the allegations in paragraph 8 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant admits the allegations in paragraph 9 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`10.
`
`Defendant admits the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`11.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 11 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by the document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the
`
`allegations. Defendant further denies that the Statement of Interest references “FDIC/FFIEC”
`
`and “FERC/DOE.”
`
`12.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 12 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by the document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the
`
`allegations.
`
`13.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 13 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by the document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 4 of 33
`
`allegations. Defendant further denies that the Statement of Interest references “FDIC/FFIEC”
`
`and “FERC/DOE.”
`
`ALLEGED BACKGROUND OF THE TECHNOLOGY
`
`14. With respect to paragraph 14 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that Russell T. Davis is identified as an inventor on the Asserted Patents. Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`15. With respect to paragraph 15 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`16. With respect to paragraph 16 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 16.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 16.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`c.
`
` With respect to paragraph 16.c of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 5 of 33
`
`d.
`
`With respect to paragraph 16.d of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`17. With respect to paragraph 17 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 17.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 17.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`c.
`
`With respect to paragraph 17.c of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`i. With respect to paragraph 17.c.i of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`ii. With respect to paragraph 17.c.ii of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 6 of 33
`
`iii. With respect to paragraph 17.c.iii of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`iv. With respect to paragraph 17.c.iv of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`18. With respect to paragraph 18 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 18.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 18.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`c.
`
`With respect to paragraph 18.c of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`19. With respect to paragraph 19 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 7 of 33
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 19.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 19.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`20.
`
` With respect to paragraph 20 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`21. With respect to paragraph 21 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`22. With respect to paragraph 22 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`23. With respect to paragraph 23 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`24. With respect to paragraph 24 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 8 of 33
`
`25. With respect to paragraph 25 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`26. With respect to paragraph 26 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 26.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 26.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`c.
`
`With respect to paragraph 26.c of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`27. With respect to paragraph 27 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`28. With respect to paragraph 28 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 9 of 33
`
`a.
`
`With respect to paragraph 28.a of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`b.
`
`With respect to paragraph 28.b of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`
`
`c.
`
`With respect to paragraph 28.c of the Second Amended Complaint,
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`ALLEGED BACKGROUND OF THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS
`
`29.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 29 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`remaining allegations and on that basis denies the same.
`
`30. With respect to paragraph 30 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`31. With respect to paragraph 31 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the Uniform Resource Locator address links to an SEC webpage where certain
`
`XBRL-compliant documents relating to Mattress Firm are available. Defendant is without
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations
`
`and on that basis denies the same.
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 10 of 33
`
`32. With respect to paragraph 32 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`33. With respect to paragraph 33 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`34. With respect to paragraph 34 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the FFIEC provides a taxonomy based on XBRL in order for financial institutions to
`
`file “call reports” with the FFIEC. With respect to the remaining allegations, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`35. With respect to paragraph 35 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`36. With respect to paragraph 36 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`37. With respect to paragraph 37 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`38. With respect to paragraph 38 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 11 of 33
`
`39. With respect to paragraph 39 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`40. With respect to paragraph 40 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`41. With respect to paragraph 41 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`42. With respect to paragraph 42 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`43. With respect to paragraph 43 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`44. With respect to paragraph 44 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`COUNT I: ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE U.S. PATENT 7,650,355
`
`45.
`
`To the extent that a response is required, Defendant incorporates by reference
`
`each of its above responses to the numbered paragraphs 1-44 of the Second Amended Complaint.
`
`46. With respect to paragraph 46 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 7,650,355 on January 19, 2010, listing Russell T.
`
`Davis as the inventor. Defendant admits that Exhibit C appears to be a copy of the ‘355 patent.
`
`-11-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 12 of 33
`
`To the extent that the phrase “duly and legally issued” implies that the claims of the patent are
`
`valid, Defendant denies the same. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`47. With respect to paragraph 47 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that, during prosecution of the application which issued as the ’355 patent, the USPTO
`
`rejected at least one claim under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and that the rejections on that basis were
`
`overcome; otherwise denies the allegations.
`
`48. With respect to paragraph 48 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
`
`relating to the quotations without citation to their source and on that basis denies the same.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`49. With respect to paragraph 49 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
`
`relating to the quotations without citation to their source and on that basis denies the same.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`50. With respect to paragraph 50 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
`
`relating to the quotations without citation to their source and on that basis denies the same.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`51.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 51 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`-12-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 13 of 33
`
`52.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 52 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`53.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 53 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`54.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 54 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`55. With respect to paragraph 55 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`56. With respect to paragraph 56 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`57.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 57 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`58.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 58 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`59.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 59 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`COUNT II: ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘816 PATENT
`
`60.
`
`To the extent that a response is required, Defendant incorporates by reference
`
`each of its above responses to the numbered paragraphs 1-59 of the Second Amended Complaint.
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 14 of 33
`
`61. With respect to paragraph 61 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 8,185,816 on May 22, 2012, listing Russell T.
`
`Davis as the inventor. Defendant admits that Exhibit E appears to be a copy of the ‘816 patent.
`
`To the extent that the phrase “duly and legally issued” implies that the claims of the patent are
`
`valid, Defendant denies the same. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`62. With respect to paragraph 62 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`63. With respect to paragraph 63 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
`
`relating to the quotations without citation to their source and on that basis denies the same.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`64. With respect to paragraph 64 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
`
`relating to the quotations without citation to their source and on that basis denies the same.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations.
`
`65.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 65 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`66.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 66 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`-14-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 15 of 33
`
`67.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 67 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`68.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 68 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`69. With respect to paragraph 69 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`70. With respect to paragraph 70 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`71.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 71 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`72.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 72 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`73. With respect to paragraph 73, Defendant admits that the SEC uses XBRL
`
`formatted data contained in submissions filed by third parties pursuant to SEC regulations.
`
`Defendant admits that Exhibit G appears to be an article titled “The SEC’s Increasingly
`
`Sophisticated Use of XBRL-Tagged Data” that purports to present an interview of Mr. Michael
`
`Willis in his individual capacity. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`-15-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 16 of 33
`
`74.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 74 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`75.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 75 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`76.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 76 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`COUNT III: ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘383 PATENT
`
`77.
`
`To the extent that a response is required, Defendant incorporates by reference
`
`each of its above responses to the numbered paragraphs 1 to 76 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`78. With respect to paragraph 78 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 9,262,383 on February 16, 2016, listing Russell T.
`
`Davis as the inventor. Defendant admits that Exhibit I appears to be a copy of the ‘383 patent.
`
`To the extent that the phrase “duly and legally issued” implies that the claims of the patent are
`
`valid, Defendant denies the same. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`79. With respect to paragraph 79 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`80. With respect to paragraph 80 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`-16-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 17 of 33
`
`81. With respect to paragraph 81 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`82.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 82 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`83.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 83 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`84.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 84 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`85.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 85 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`86. With respect to paragraph 86 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`87. With respect to paragraph 87 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`88.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 88 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`-17-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 18 of 33
`
`89.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 89 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`90. With respect to paragraph 90, Defendant admits that the SEC uses XBRL
`
`formatted data contained in submissions filed by third parties pursuant to SEC regulations.
`
`Defendant admits that Exhibit G appears to be an article titled “The SEC’s Increasingly
`
`Sophisticated Use of XBRL-Tagged Data” that purports to present an interview of Mr. Michael
`
`Willis in his individual capacity. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`91.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 91 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`92.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 92 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`93.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 93 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`COUNT IV: ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘384 PATENT
`
`94.
`
`To the extent that a response is required, Defendant incorporates by reference
`
`each of its above responses to the numbered paragraphs 1 to 93 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`95. With respect to paragraph 95 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits that the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 9,262,384 on February 16, 2016, listing Russell T.
`
`Davis as the inventor. Defendant admits that Exhibit L appears to be a copy of the ‘384 patent.
`
`To the extent that the phrase “duly and legally issued” implies that the claims of the patent are
`
`valid, Defendant denies the same. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments and denies the same.
`
`-18-
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-00859-RTH Document 55 Filed 05/11/21 Page 19 of 33
`
`96. With respect to paragraph 96 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`97. With respect to paragraph 97 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`98. With respect to paragraph 98 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`on that basis denies the same.
`
`99.
`
`The allegations contained in paragraph 99 constitute conclusions of law to which
`
`no answer is required. To the extent required, Defendant admits the allegations to the extent
`
`supported by its Statement of Interest, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise
`
`Defendant denies the allegations.
`
`100. Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 100 of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`101. With respect to paragraph 101 of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant
`
`admits the allegations to the extent reflected by the United States’ grant of its authorization and
`
`consent for the defendants in District of Delaware Case No. 17-cv-933 to use XBRL to file
`
`documents with the SEC pursuant to federal regulation; otherwise denies the allegations.
`
`102. Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 102 of the Se
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
