Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`
`
`
` C.A. No. __________________
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`§§§§§§§§§§§
`
`
`AGINCOURT GAMING, LLC,
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`SONY ONLINE ENTERTAINMENT LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Agincourt Gaming, LLC (“Agincourt Gaming”) by its undersigned attorneys, for
`
`its complaint against Defendant Sony Online Entertainment LLC (“Sony”), hereby alleges the
`
`following:
`
`
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Agincourt Gaming is a limited liability company organized and existing under the
`
`laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Dallas, Texas.
`2.
`
`Sony Online Entertainment, a division of Sony Corporation, is a limited liability
`
`company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place
`
`of business in San Diego, California.
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This is a complaint for patent infringement arising under 35 U.S.C. §§ 100, et
`
`seq., and in particular § 271.
`4.
`
`This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331 and 1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 2
`
`5.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Sony because it has committed and
`
`continues to commit acts of patent infringement in this judicial district and because it regularly
`
`conducts and solicits business in this judicial district, thus deriving substantial revenue from
`
`goods used or services rendered in this judicial district.
`6.
`
`Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b) in that
`
`Defendant Sony resides in this district, has a regular and established practice of business in this
`
`district, and has committed acts of infringement in this district.
`
`
`
`ASSERTED PATENTS
`
`7.
`
`On July 6, 2004, United States Patent No. 6,758,755 (“the ’755 patent”) was duly
`
`and legally issued for an invention entitled “Prize Redemption System for Games Executed Over
`
`A Wide Area Network,” which also has a related continuation in progress. A true and correct
`
`copy of the ’755 patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
`8.
`
`On October 23, 2001, United States Patent No. 6,306,035 (“the ’035 patent”) was
`
`duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Graphical User Interface For Providing Gaming
`
`And Prize Redemption Capabilities.” A true and correct copy of the ’035 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit 2.
`9.
`
`On June 4, 2013, United States Patent No. 8,454,432 (“the ’432 patent” was duly
`
`and legally issued for an invention titled “Method for Providing Network Gaming System.” A
`
`true and correct copy of the ’432 patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`10.
`
`The ’755 patent, the ’035 patent, and the ’432 patent issued from a series of
`
`applications extending back to November 14, 1996.
`11.
`
`Agincourt Gaming was assigned the ’755 patent, the ’035 patent, and the ’432
`
`patent, and continues to hold all rights and interest in all three patents.
`12.
`
`Sony designs, makes, markets, uses, offers for sale, and/or sells the following
`
`products that infringe the ’755 patent, the ’035 patent, and the ’432 patent: EverQuest and
`
`PlanetSide.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 3
`
`13.
`
`To redress Sony’s infringement of the ’755 patent, the ’035 patent, and the ’432
`
`patent, Agincourt Gaming seeks actual damages and a permanent injunction to shut down Sony’s
`
`infringing games.
`
`
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`The Recent Rise of Social Network Gaming
`
`14.
`
`The market for video games has changed dramatically in the last ten years, in
`
`terms of delivery of game content, the devices on which games are played, and user
`
`demographics.
`15.
`
`Video games used to be the sole domain of dedicated console providers and high
`
`budget PC content producers. But in the last few years, content delivery over the Internet has
`
`matured. The rise of social networking has created a new outlet for games and attracted a new
`
`type of “casual” gamer.
`16.
`
`The widespread popularity of social network games – which incorporate content
`
`or social connections over online social networks like Facebook – is a relatively recent
`
`phenomenon. As Sony’s founder and CEO has acknowledged, before 2007 “nobody offered
`
`games on the web that were available and accessible to everyone. They were confined to niches
`
`of hardcore gamers.”
`17.
`
`Online social gaming has become increasingly popular since 2007, when
`
`Facebook opened its website to external developers of ad-on games and other applications. That
`
`year, Scrabulous, a game mimicking the popular board-game Scrabble, launched on Facebook
`
`and quickly expanded to 500,000 daily users.
`18.
`
`Scrabulous may have been the first game to successfully take advantage of
`
`Facebook’s mammoth social network, but it was hardly the last. Developers quickly realized
`
`that providing games over Facebook would allow them to reach hundreds of millions of potential
`
`users, at low cost and with high potential for profits.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 4
`
`19.
`
`Following the early success of Scrabulous, the prevalence and popularity of
`
`online social network games skyrocketed. A July 2010 market research survey revealed that
`
`56.8 million Americans – roughly one fifth of the U.S. population – played a social network
`
`game in the prior three months. Approximately 35% of those users were new to online gaming.
`
`It is estimated that nearly 62 million people (or 27% of Internet users) in the United States will
`
`play one game on a social network monthly in 2011. The social gaming industry generated $1
`
`billion in revenue in 2010, and analysts forecast that worldwide social gaming revenues will
`
`reach $5 billion per year by 2015.
`
`
`Agincourt Gaming and the Patents-In-Suit
`
`20.
`
`Agincourt Gaming was formed in April 2011. Agincourt Gaming is a provider of
`
`online social network games. Its business plan focuses on developing its own online social
`
`network games and then launching the games for play online.
`21.
`
` In 2013, Agincourt Gaming launched its newest online social network game,
`
`Battle Conquest. Battle Conquest incorporates strategy, simulation, and role-play elements in an
`
`online platform that utilizes social interaction to enhance the gaming experience. As players
`
`interact with the game, they have opportunities to make in-game purchases of virtual goods and
`
`other game-related items. To date, Battle Conquest has been played over 1.5 million times. In
`
`addition, there are over 130,000 registered players who have fought over five million online
`
`battles. Battle Conquest is currently published worldwide in English by two Internet gaming
`
`portals. Battle Conquest practices the ’755, ’035, and ’432 patents. Battle Conquest, like many
`
`of Sony’s social network games, provides a prize redemption system based on the outcome of
`
`game play. Battle Conquest competes with Sony’s games, and Agincourt Gaming is being
`
`irreparably harmed by Sony’s infringement of the ’755, ’035, and ’432 patents.
`22.
`
`Today, the largest source of revenues for social network game providers is the
`
`sale of virtual goods. Consumers are expected to spend $653 million in virtual goods this year,
`
`up from $510 million last year. Social games typically allow users to obtain virtual goods in two
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 5
`
`ways, either by earning them via a prize redemption system based on game play or by purchasing
`
`them using PayPal and/or credit cards. Prize-redemption systems help game providers attract
`
`and retain users, who drive advertising revenue and who may eventually decide to pay for virtual
`
`goods with actual currency (i.e., by paying legal tender for in-game currency, which can then be
`
`used to acquire in-game items). The ability to provide more and more prizes for players to attain
`
`is a key retention component for social games. Players must consistently have new goals to
`
`strive for within the game, and the acquisition of in-game wealth, status, and/or power is a
`
`foundational driver of the social gaming experience.
`23.
`
`Agincourt Gaming’s patents-in-suit, which claim priority to 1996, were both far
`
`ahead of their time in anticipating the development of credits-based online gaming. Long before
`
`the explosion of online games, Agincourt Gaming’s patents-in-suit recognized that allowing
`
`online gamers to earn and redeem prizes – including, in particular, game enhancements – based
`
`on the outcome of game play would be desirable to players but difficult for game providers to
`
`effectively maintain and display.
`24.
`
`Agincourt Gaming’s patents-in-suit solve
`
`the problems of
`
`incentivizing
`
`continuing game play in the context of wide area networks. They do so in an efficient manner
`
`that allows for prize management in a highly scalable system.
`
`
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,758,755
`
`25.
`
`Agincourt Gaming incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 24 as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`26.
`
`Sony has been and still is infringing the ’755 patent, literally or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, by making, using, importing, offering to sell, and/or selling certain software
`
`products, including, but not limited to the products identified in paragraph 11 above.
`27.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of Sony’s acts of infringement, Agincourt
`
`Gaming has been, is being, and will be damaged. Sony’s infringement of Agincourt Gaming’s
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 6
`
`exclusive rights under the ’755 patent will continue to damage Agincourt Gaming, causing
`
`irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
`28.
`
`Agincourt Gaming also is entitled to recover from Sony the damages sustained by
`
`Agincourt Gaming as a result of Sony’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`29.
`
`Agincourt Gaming reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Sony’s
`
`infringement is willful and deliberate, entitling Agincourt Gaming to increased damages under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 284 and to attorney’s fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 285.
`
`
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,306,035
`
`30.
`
`Agincourt Gaming incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 29 as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`31.
`
`Sony has been and still is infringing the ’035 patent, literally or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, by making, using, importing, offering to sell, and/or selling certain software
`
`products, including, but not limited to the products identified in paragraph 12 above.
`32.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of Sony’s acts of infringement, Agincourt
`
`Gaming has been, is being, and will be damaged. Sony’s infringement of Agincourt Gaming’s
`
`exclusive rights under the ’035 patent will continue to damage Agincourt Gaming, causing
`
`irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
`33.
`
`Agincourt Gaming also is entitled to recover from Sony the damages sustained by
`
`Agincourt Gaming as a result of Defendant Sony’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at
`
`trial.
`
`34.
`
`Agincourt Gaming reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Sony’s
`
`infringement is willful and deliberate, entitling Agincourt Gaming to increased damages under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 284 and to attorney’s fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 285.
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 7
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,454,432
`
`35.
`
`Agincourt Gaming incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 34 as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`36.
`
`Sony has been and still is infringing the ’432 patent, literally or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, by making, using, importing, offering to sell, and/or selling certain software
`
`products, including, but not limited to the products identified in paragraph 12 above.
`37.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of Sony’s acts of infringement, Agincourt
`
`Gaming has been, is being, and will be damaged. Sony’s infringement of Agincourt Gaming’s
`
`exclusive rights under the ’432 patent will continue to damage Agincourt Gaming, causing
`
`irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
`38.
`
`Agincourt Gaming also is entitled to recover from Sony the damages sustained by
`
`Agincourt Gaming as a result of Sony’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`39.
`
`Agincourt Gaming reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Sony’s
`
`infringement is willful and deliberate, entitling Agincourt Gaming to increased damages under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 284 and to attorney’s fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 285.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`Agincourt Gaming respectfully requests entry of judgment in its favor and against Sony
`
`as follows:
`
`(a) Declaring that Sony has infringed and continues to infringe the ’755, ’035, and ’432
`
`patents;
`
`(b) Awarding actual damages arising out of Sony’s infringement of the ’755, ’035, and
`
`’432 patents, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in an amount
`
`according to proof;
`
`(c) Permanently enjoining Sony and its officers, agents, employees, and those acting in
`
`privity with it, from further infringement of the ’755, ’035, and ’432 patents;
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 8
`
`(d) Awarding attorney’s fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or as otherwise permitted by
`
`law; and
`
`(e) Awarding such other costs and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Agincourt Gaming respectfully requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FARNAN LLP
`
`
`
`/s/ Brian E. Farnan
`Brian E. Farnan (Bar No. 4089)
`Michael J. Farnan (Bar No. 5165)
`919 N. Market Street, 12th Floor
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801
`(302)777-0300
`(302)777-0301 (fax)
`bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`Dated: February 14, 2014
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`William Christopher Carmody
`SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
`560 Lexington Avenue, 15th Floor
`New York, New York 10022
`Telephone: (212) 336-8330
`Facsimile: (212) 336-8340
`bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
`
`David D. Shank
`SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
`901 Main Street, Suite 5100
`Dallas, Texas 75202
`Telephone: (214) 754-1935
`Facsimile: (214) 754-1933
`dshank@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Ian Bradford Crosby
`SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
`1201 Third Ave., Ste. 3800
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`Telephone: (206) 516-3861
`Facsimile: (206) 516-3883
`icrosby@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Manmeet Walia
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00198-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/14/14 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 9
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Agincourt Gaming, LLC
`
`9
`
`1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100
`Houston, TX 77002
`Telephone: (713) 651-9366
`Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
`mwalia@susmangodfrey.com