Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 1 of 22 PageID #: 2076
`
`
`
`NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 23-cv-1237-GBW
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`HP, INC.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`TO HP, INC.’S COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`
`
`Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Nokia Technologies Oy (“Nokia”) hereby answers the
`
`Counterclaims of HP, Inc. (“HP”) in numbered paragraphs corresponding to the paragraphs of
`
`Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff HP’s Original Counterclaims. (D.I. 11 at 44–83.) To the extent
`
`any allegation contained in HP’s Counterclaims is not specifically admitted, it is hereby denied.
`
`Nokia further denies any allegation that may be implied or inferred from the headings of HP’s
`
`Counterclaims.
`
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia admits that it has brought claims against HP in the U.S. International Trade
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Commission, and Unified Patent Court in Germany. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia admits that it owns patent with certain claims that are essential to the
`
`Asserted Standards, but otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 2 of 22 PageID #: 2077
`
`
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`Nokia admits the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia admits the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`STANDARD SETTING ORGANIZATIONS AND STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
`
`15.
`
`Nokia admits that standard-development organizations (“SDOs”) develop,
`
`institute, and disseminate technical standards and specifications in various industries that allow a
`
`product produced by one manufacturer to connect and interoperate with a product produced by
`
`another manufacturer, when both products support the same standard. Nokia lacks knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in this paragraph,
`
`and on that basis, denies them.
`
`16.
`
`Nokia admits that SDOs oversee the development of technical standards and that
`
`SDO members submit technological ideas for inclusion into standards. Nokia admits that SDOs
`
`evaluate and ultimately adopt certain technologies when developing standards. Nokia admits that
`
`standards may change over time. Nokia lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
`
`about the truth of the remaining allegations in this paragraph, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`17.
`
`Nokia admits that standards lead to improved products for consumers. Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 3 of 22 PageID #: 2078
`
`
`
`18.
`
`Nokia admits that certain SDOs maintain policies relating to intellectual property
`
`rights, sometimes referred to as IPR policies. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`19.
`
`Nokia admits that certain SDOs maintain policies relating to intellectual property
`
`rights, sometimes referred to as IPR policies. To the extent that this paragraph purports to
`
`paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the content of any IPR policy, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`20.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the content of any IPR policy, Nokia refers to the underlying document itself for a true and
`
`complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph as
`
`calling for legal conclusions.
`
`21.
`
`Nokia admits that certain SDOs have IPR policies that govern standards adopted
`
`by such SDOs, and the requirements of such policies are set forth in those documents. Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`ITU’S COMMON PATENT POLICY AND GUIDELINES CONCERNING
`INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
`
`22.
`
`Nokia admits that that the International Telecommunication Union is a
`
`Switzerland-based SDO composed of
`
`three sectors. Nokia admits
`
`that
`
`the
`
`ITU’s
`
`telecommunications sector, ITU-T, oversees the development of certain standards. Nokia lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations
`
`in this paragraph, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`23.
`
`Nokia admits that certain Nokia affiliates have been members of ITU-T. Nokia
`
`admits that the ITU-T maintains a Common Patent Policy which may be found at the following
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 4 of 22 PageID #: 2079
`
`
`
`website: https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/policy.aspx. Nokia otherwise denies
`
`the
`
`allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`24.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Common Patent Policy, Nokia refers to the underlying document itself for a
`
`true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`25.
`
`Nokia admits that the ITU-T has published a document titled “Guidelines for
`
`Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC,” (“Guidelines”) which
`
`is
`
`available
`
`at
`
`the
`
`following
`
`website:
`
`https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-
`
`t/oth/04/04/T04040000010006PDFE.pdf. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase,
`
`summarize, or characterize the contents of the Guidelines, Nokia refers to the underlying document
`
`itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in
`
`this paragraph.
`
`26.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Common Patent Policy or the Guidelines, Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents. Nokia otherwise denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`27.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Guidelines, Nokia refers to the underlying document itself for a true and
`
`complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph as
`
`calling for legal conclusions.
`
`NOKIA’S NON-DISCLOSURE AND/OR DELAYED DISCLOSURE OF IPR DURING
`THE STANDARD-SETTING PROCESS
`
`28.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 5 of 22 PageID #: 2080
`
`
`
`29.
`
`30.
`
`31.
`
`32.
`
`33.
`
`34.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`Nokia lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of
`
`the allegations in this paragraph, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`35.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`THE ’134 PATENT
`
`36.
`
`The ’134 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`37.
`
`The ’134 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`38.
`
`39.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’134 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`40.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 1 of the ’134 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`41.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit F to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-6), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 6 of 22 PageID #: 2081
`
`
`
`THE ’991 PATENT
`
`42.
`
`The ’991 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`43.
`
`The ’991 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`44.
`
`45.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’991 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`46.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 22 of the ’991 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.265 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`47.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit E to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-5), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’321 PATENT
`
`48.
`
`The ’321 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`49.
`
`The ’321 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`50.
`
`51.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’321 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 7 of 22 PageID #: 2082
`
`
`
`52.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 8 of the ’321 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`53.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit F to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-6), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`54.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 8 of the ’321 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.265 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`55.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit D to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-4), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’273 PATENT
`
`56.
`
`The ’273 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`57.
`
`The ’273 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`58.
`
`59.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’273 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 8 of 22 PageID #: 2083
`
`
`
`60.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 1 of the ’273 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`61.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit G to the Counterclaims (D. I. 11-7), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’818 PATENT
`
`62.
`
`The ’818 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`63.
`
`The ’818 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`64.
`
`65.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’818 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`66.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 6 of the ’818 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`67.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit H to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-8), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 9 of 22 PageID #: 2084
`
`
`
`68.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 6 of the ’818 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.265 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`69.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit D to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-4), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’808 PATENT
`
`70.
`
`The ’808 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`71.
`
`The ’808 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`72.
`
`73.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’808 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`74.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 7 of the ’808 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`75.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit I to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-9), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 10 of 22 PageID #: 2085
`
`
`
`THE ’599 PATENT
`
`76.
`
`The ’599 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`77.
`
`The ’599 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`78.
`
`79.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’599 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`80.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 1 of the ’599 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`81.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit G to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-7), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’469 PATENT
`
`82.
`
`The ’469 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`83.
`
`The ’469 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`84.
`
`85.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’469 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 11 of 22 PageID #: 2086
`
`
`
`86.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 1 of the ’469 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.264 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`87.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit G to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-7), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`THE ’267 PATENT
`
`88.
`
`The ’267 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`89.
`
`The ’267 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`90.
`
`91.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’267 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`92.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 19 of the ’267 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.265 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`93.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit J to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-10), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 12 of 22 PageID #: 2087
`
`
`
`THE ’714 PATENT
`
`94.
`
`The ’714 Patent speaks for itself, and Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`95.
`
`The ’714 Patent and related assignment documents speak for themselves, and Nokia
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`96.
`
`97.
`
`Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`The ’714 Patent and its prosecution history speak for themselves, and Nokia denies
`
`the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`98.
`
`Nokia admits that it has alleged that at least Claim 9 of the ’714 Patent is essential
`
`to the H.265 Standard. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal
`
`conclusions.
`
`99.
`
`To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the Exhibit D to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-4), Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`document itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the
`
`allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`NOKIA’S REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH ITS FRAND COMMITMENTS AND ITS
`GLOBAL LITIGATION CAMPAIGN SEEKING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`100. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`101. Nokia admits that it contacted HP in 2019 regarding HP’s need for a license to
`
`Nokia’s portfolio of patents with claims essential to H.264 and/or H.265. Nokia admits that, during
`
`the parties’ negotiations, it provided HP a presentation on the H.264 standard as well as a list of
`
`patents related to H.264. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or
`
`characterize the contents of those communications and documents, Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 13 of 22 PageID #: 2088
`
`
`
`communications and documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents,
`
`and Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`102. Nokia admits that on July 22, 2020 it sent HP certain claims charts and a list of
`
`exemplary Nokia patents and HP products related to H.264. Nokia admits that on March 8, 2021
`
`it sent HP lists of patents related to H.264. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase,
`
`summarize, or characterize the contents of those communications and documents, Nokia refers to
`
`the underlying communications and documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of
`
`their contents, and Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent
`
`inconsistent therewith.
`
`103. Nokia admits that in December 2020 it sent HP a proposed patent license agreement
`
`covering Nokia’s patent claims that are essential to the decoding functionality of the H.264
`
`standard. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`104. Nokia admits that HP offered a lump sum of $884,864 for a “license and release”
`
`to Nokia’s portfolio of H.264 patent claims. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph.
`
`105. Nokia admits that on May 13, 2021, it sent to HP three proposed patent license
`
`agreements covering Nokia’s patent claims related to H.264 decoding, H.264 encoding, or both
`
`H.264 decoding and encoding. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize,
`
`or characterize the contents of those proposed patent license agreements, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents, and Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`106. Nokia admits that on May 13, 2021, June 9, 2021 and July 9, 2021, it sent to HP
`
`certain claims charts related to the H.264 and H.265 standards. To the extent that this paragraph
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 14 of 22 PageID #: 2089
`
`
`
`purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of those claims charts, Nokia refers
`
`to the underlying documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents, and
`
`Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`107. Nokia admits that on August 13, 2021, it sent to HP three proposed patent license
`
`agreements. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of those proposed patent license agreements, Nokia refers to the underlying
`
`documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents, and Nokia otherwise
`
`denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`108. Nokia admits that it received an email from HP on August 16, 2021 concerning, in
`
`part, Nokia’s proposed patent license agreements. To the extent that this paragraph purports to
`
`paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of that communication, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying communication itself for a true and complete recitation of its contents, and Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`109. Nokia admits that it sent an email to HP on August 27, 2021. To the extent that this
`
`paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of that communication,
`
`Nokia refers to the underlying communication itself for a true and complete recitation of its
`
`contents, and Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent
`
`therewith.
`
`110. Nokia admits that the parties exchanged communications in September 2021. To
`
`the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of
`
`those communications, Nokia refers to the underlying communications themselves for a true and
`
`complete recitation of their contents, and Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith. Nokia further admits that the parties participated in technical
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 15 of 22 PageID #: 2090
`
`
`
`discussions for several months. Except as expressly admitted, Nokia denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph.
`
`111. Nokia admits that HP requested a call in late March 2022, that the parties met on
`
`June 28, 2022, that Nokia extended another licensing proposal to HP on June 28, 2022. To the
`
`extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of those
`
`communications, Nokia refers to the underlying communications themselves for a true and
`
`complete recitation of their contents, and Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph
`
`to the extent inconsistent therewith. Except as expressly admitted, Nokia denies the allegations in
`
`this paragraph.
`
`112. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`113. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`COUNT I – BREACH OF CONTRACT (FRAND) – UNREASONABLE ROYALTY
`DEMANDS
`
`114. Nokia incorporates by reference its responses to the foregoing paragraphs.
`
`115. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions. To
`
`the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize the contents of
`
`the Exhibit C to the Counterclaims (D.I. 11-3), Nokia refers to the underlying document itself for
`
`a true and complete recitation of its contents.
`
`116. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of certain declaration forms that Nokia submitted to the ITU-T, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents. Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 16 of 22 PageID #: 2091
`
`
`
`117. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions and/or
`
`because it lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the
`
`allegations in this paragraph.
`
`118. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`119. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`120. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions and/or
`
`because it lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the
`
`allegations in this paragraph.
`
`COUNT II – BREACH OF CONTRACT (FRAND) – SEEKING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`AND UNILATERALLY ABANDONING NEGOTIATIONS
`
`121. Nokia incorporates by reference its responses to the foregoing paragraphs.
`
`122. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`123. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`124. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`125. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`126. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`127. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions and/or
`
`because it lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the
`
`allegations in this paragraph.
`
`COUNT III – DECLARATION OF UNENFORCEABILITY – LATE DISCLOSURE OF
`IPR DECLARATIONS
`
`128. Nokia incorporates by reference its responses to the foregoing paragraphs.
`
`129. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of the ITU-T’s Common Patent Policy, Nokia refers to the underlying document itself
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 17 of 22 PageID #: 2092
`
`
`
`for a true and complete recitation of its contents. Nokia otherwise denies the allegations in this
`
`paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`130. Nokia admits that certain employees of Nokia and/or Nokia affiliates attended
`
`standards development meetings for H.264 and H.265 and submitted technical proposals for those
`
`standards. Except as expressly admitted, Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`131. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of certain declaration forms that Nokia submitted to the ITU-T, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents. Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`132. To the extent that this paragraph purports to paraphrase, summarize, or characterize
`
`the contents of certain declaration forms that Nokia submitted to the ITU-T, Nokia refers to the
`
`underlying documents themselves for a true and complete recitation of their contents. Nokia
`
`otherwise denies the allegations in this paragraph to the extent inconsistent therewith.
`
`133. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`134. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`135. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`136. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph as calling for legal conclusions.
`
`137. Nokia denies the allegations in this paragraph.
`
`COUNT IV – VIOLATION OF THE SHERMAN ACT (SECTION 2)
`
`138. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`139. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-01237-GBW Document 31 Filed 05/28/24 Page 18 of 22 PageID #: 2093
`
`
`
`140. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`141. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`142. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`143. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`144. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`145. Because the Court has dismissed HP’s claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
`
`no response is required to this paragraph.
`
`COUNT V – BREACH OF DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN