Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 24
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`
`REALTIME DATA LLC d/b/a IXO,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`ACRONIS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. ________________
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST ACRONIS, INC.
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United
`
`States of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. in which Plaintiff Realtime Data LLC d/b/a IXO
`
`(“Plaintiff,” “Realtime,” or “IXO”) makes the following allegations against Defendant Acronis,
`
`Inc. (“Acronis”):
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Realtime is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of
`
`New York. Realtime has places of business at 5851 Legacy Circle, Plano, Texas 75024, 1828
`
`E.S.E. Loop 323, Tyler, Texas 75701, and 66 Palmer Avenue, Suite 27, Bronxville, NY 10708.
`
`Since the 1990s, Realtime has researched and developed specific solutions for data compression,
`
`including, for example, those that increase the speeds at which data can be stored and accessed.
`
`As recognition of its innovations rooted in this technological field, Realtime holds 47 United
`
`States patents and has numerous pending patent applications. Realtime has licensed patents in
`
`this portfolio to many of the world’s leading technology companies. The patents-in-suit relate to
`
`Realtime’s development of advanced systems and methods for fast and efficient data
`
`compression using numerous innovative compression techniques based on, for example,
`
`particular attributes of the data.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 2 of 24
`
`
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Acronis Inc. (“Acronis”) is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 1 Van de Graaff Drive, Suite 301, Burlington,
`
`MA, 01803. On information and belief, Acronis can be served through its registered agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Rd Suite 400, Wilmington, DE 19808.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the
`
`United States Code. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331 and 1338(a).
`4.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Acronis in this action
`
`because Acronis has committed acts within the District of Massachusetts giving rise to this
`
`action and has established minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of
`
`jurisdiction over Acronis would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`Acronis, directly and through subsidiaries or intermediaries, has committed and continues to
`
`commit acts of infringement in this District by, among other things, offering to sell and selling
`
`products and/or services that infringe the asserted patents.
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Upon information and
`
`belief, Acronis has transacted business in the District of Massachusetts, has committed acts of
`
`direct and indirect infringement in this District, and has a regular and established place of
`
`business in this District.
`
`
`
`COUNT I
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,054,728
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-5 above, as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`7.
`
`Plaintiff Realtime is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No.
`
`9,054,728 (“the ‘728 patent”) entitled “Data compression systems and methods.” The ‘728
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 3 of 24
`
`
`
`patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on June 9,
`
`2015. A true and correct copy of the ‘728 Patent is included as Exhibit A.
`8.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has offered for sale, sold and/or imported into
`
`the United States Acronis products that infringe the ‘728 patent, and continues to do so. By way
`
`of illustrative example, these infringing products include, without limitation, Acronis’s products
`
`and services, e.g., Acronis Backup Advanced, including version 11.7 thereof, and all versions
`
`and variations thereof since the issuance of the ‘728 patent (“Accused Instrumentality”).
`9.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has directly infringed and continues to
`
`infringe the ‘728 patent, for example, through its own use and testing of the Accused
`
`Instrumentality, which constitute systems for compressing data claimed by Claim 1 of the ‘728
`
`patent, comprising a processor; one or more content dependent data compression encoders; and a
`
`single data compression encoder; wherein the processor is configured: to analyze data within a
`
`data block to identify one or more parameters or attributes of the data wherein the analyzing of
`
`the data within the data block to identify the one or more parameters or attributes of the data
`
`excludes analyzing based solely on a descriptor that is indicative of the one or more parameters
`
`or attributes of the data within the data block; to perform content dependent data compression
`
`with the one or more content dependent data compression encoders if the one or more parameters
`
`or attributes of the data are identified; and to perform data compression with the single data
`
`compression encoder, if the one or more parameters or attributes of the data are not identified.
`
`Upon information and belief, Acronis uses the Accused Instrumentality, an infringing system, for
`
`its own internal non-testing business purposes, while testing the Accused Instrumentality, and
`
`while providing technical support and repair services for the Accused Instrumentality to
`
`Acronis’s customers.
`10.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has had knowledge of the ‘728 patent since at
`
`least the filing of this Complaint or shortly thereafter, and on information and belief, Acronis
`
`knew of the ‘728 patent and knew of its infringement, including by way of this lawsuit.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 4 of 24
`
`
`
`11.
`
`Acronis’s affirmative acts of making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`importing the Accused Instrumentality has induced and continues to induce users of the Accused
`
`Instrumentality to use the Accused Instrumentality in its normal and customary way on
`
`compatible systems to infringe the ‘728 patent, knowing that when the Accused Instrumentality
`
`is used in its ordinary and customary manner with such compatible systems, such systems
`
`constitute infringing systems for compressing data comprising; a processor; one or more content
`
`dependent data compression encoders; and a single data compression encoder; wherein the
`
`processor is configured: to analyze data within a data block to identify one or more parameters or
`
`attributes of the data wherein the analyzing of the data within the data block to identify the one
`
`or more parameters or attributes of the data excludes analyzing based solely on a descriptor that
`
`is indicative of the one or more parameters or attributes of the data within the data block; to
`
`perform content dependent data compression with the one or more content dependent data
`
`compression encoders if the one or more parameters or attributes of the data are identified; and to
`
`perform data compression with the single data compression encoder, if the one or more
`
`parameters or attributes of the data are not identified. For example, Acronis explains to
`
`customers the benefits of using the Accused Instrumentality: “One of the key capabilities of the
`
`Acronis storage node is deduplication. Deduplication technology helps reduce storage costs and
`
`network bandwidth utilization by eliminating duplicate data blocks when you back up and
`
`transfer data. Acronis Backup Advanced deduplication helps you to: 1. Reduce storage space
`
`usage by storing only unique data 2. Eliminate the need to invest in data deduplication-specific
`
`hardware 3. Reduce network load because less data is transferred, leaving more bandwidth for
`
`your production tasks.” See
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 2.
`
`Acronis specifically intended and was aware that the normal and customary use of the Accused
`
`Instrumentality on compatible systems would infringe the ‘728 patent. Acronis performed the
`
`acts that constitute induced infringement, and would induce actual infringement, with the
`
`knowledge of the ‘728 patent and with the knowledge, or willful blindness to the probability, that
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 5 of 24
`
`
`
`the induced acts would constitute infringement. On information and belief, Acronis engaged in
`
`such inducement to promote the sales of the Accused Instrumentality, e.g., through Acronis’s
`
`user manuals, product support, marketing materials, and training materials to actively induce the
`
`users of the accused products to infringe the ‘728 patent. Accordingly, Acronis has induced and
`
`continues to induce end users of the accused products to use the accused products in their
`
`ordinary and customary way with compatible systems to make and/or use systems infringing the
`
`‘728 patent, knowing that such use of the Accused Instrumentality with compatible systems will
`
`result in infringement of the ‘728 patent.
`12.
`
`Acronis also indirectly infringes the ‘728 patent by manufacturing, using, selling,
`
`offering for sale, and/or importing the accused products, with knowledge that the accused
`
`products were and are especially manufactured and/or especially adapted for use in infringing the
`
`‘728 patent and are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-
`
`infringing use. On information and belief, the Accused Instrumentality is designed to function
`
`with compatible hardware to create systems for compressing data comprising; a processor; one
`
`or more content dependent data compression encoders; and a single data compression encoder;
`
`wherein the processor is configured: to analyze data within a data block to identify one or more
`
`parameters or attributes of the data wherein the analyzing of the data within the data block to
`
`identify the one or more parameters or attributes of the data excludes analyzing based solely on a
`
`descriptor that is indicative of the one or more parameters or attributes of the data within the data
`
`block; to perform content dependent data compression with the one or more content dependent
`
`data compression encoders if the one or more parameters or attributes of the data are identified;
`
`and to perform data compression with the single data compression encoder, if the one or more
`
`parameters or attributes of the data are not identified. Because the Accused Instrumentality is
`
`designed to operate as the claimed system for compressing input data, the Accused
`
`Instrumentality has no substantial non-infringing uses, and any other uses would be unusual, far-
`
`fetched, illusory, impractical, occasional, aberrant, or experimental. Acronis’s manufacture, use,
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 6 of 24
`
`
`
`sale, offering for sale, and/or importation of the Accused Instrumentality constitutes contributory
`
`infringement of the ‘728 patent.
`13.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality is a system for compressing data, comprising a
`
`processor. For example, the Accused Instrumentality must run on hardware containing a
`
`processor. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at
`
`16 (“Use a minimum of 2.5 GHz CPU with at least four cores. Multi-CPU systems are also
`
`supported.”).
`14.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality is a system for compressing data, comprising one or
`
`more content dependent data compression encoders. For example, the Accused Instrumentality
`
`performs deduplication, which is a content dependent data compression encoder. Performing
`
`deduplication results in representation of data with fewer bits. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 5
`
`(“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself.”).
`15.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality comprises a single data compression encoder. See,
`
`e.g., http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf
`
`at 10 (“The Acronis Backup agent compresses the backed up data before sending it to the
`
`server.”).
`16.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality analyzes data within a data block to identify one or
`
`more parameters or attributes of the data, for example, whether the data is duplicative of data
`
`previously transmitted and/or stored, where the analysis does not rely only on the descriptor. See,
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 7 of 24
`
`
`
`e.g., http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf
`
`at 5 (“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself.”).
`17.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality performs content dependent data compression with
`
`the one or more content dependent data compression encoders if the one or more parameters or
`
`attributes of the data are identified. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 5
`
`(“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself.”).
`18.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality performs data compression with the single data
`
`compression encoder, if the one or more parameters or attributes of the data are not identified.
`
`See, e.g., http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-
`
`US.pdf at 10 (“The Acronis Backup agent compresses the backed up data before sending it to the
`
`server. Hash values for each data block are calculated before compression. If two equal blocks
`
`are compressed with different levels of compression, they are still recognized as duplicates.”).
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 8 of 24
`
`
`
`19.
`
`Acronis also infringes other claims of the ‘728 patent, directly and through
`
`inducing infringement and contributory infringement, for similar reasons as explained above
`
`with respect to Claim 1 of the ‘728 patent.
`20.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused Instrumentality, and touting the benefits of using the Accused
`
`Instrumentality’s compression features, Acronis has injured Realtime and is liable to Realtime
`
`for infringement of the ‘728 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`21.
`
`As a result of Acronis’s infringement of the ‘728 patent, Plaintiff Realtime is
`
`entitled to monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Acronis’s infringement,
`
`but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Acronis,
`
`together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`
`
`COUNT II
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,415,530
`
`22.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-21 above, as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`23.
`
`Plaintiff Realtime is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No.
`
`7,415,530 (“the ‘530 patent”) entitled “System and methods for accelerated data storage and
`
`retrieval.” The ‘530 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office on August 19, 2008. A true and correct copy of the ‘530 patent is included as
`
`Exhibit B.
`24.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has offered for sale, sold and/or imported into
`
`the United States Acronis products that infringe the ‘530 patent, and continues to do so. By way
`
`of illustrative example, these infringing products include, without limitation, Acronis’s products
`
`and services, e.g., Acronis Backup Advanced, including version 11.7 thereof, and all versions
`
`and variations thereof since the issuance of the ‘530 patent (“Accused Instrumentality”).
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 9 of 24
`
`
`
`25.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has directly infringed and continues to
`
`infringe the ‘530 patent, for example, through its own use and testing of the Accused
`
`Instrumentality, which constitutes a system comprising: a memory device; and a data accelerator,
`
`wherein said data accelerator is coupled to said memory device, a data stream is received by said
`
`data accelerator in received form, said data stream includes a first data block and a second data
`
`block, said data stream is compressed by said data accelerator to provide a compressed data
`
`stream by compressing said first data block with a first compression technique and said second
`
`data block with a second compression technique, said first and second compression techniques
`
`are different, said compressed data stream is stored on said memory device, said compression
`
`and storage occurs faster than said data stream is able to be stored on said memory device in said
`
`received form, a first data descriptor is stored on said memory device indicative of said first
`
`compression technique, and said first descriptor is utilized to decompress the portion of said
`
`compressed data stream associated with said first data block. Upon information and belief,
`
`Acronis uses the Accused Instrumentality, an infringing system, for its own internal non-testing
`
`business purposes, while testing the Accused Instrumentality, and while providing technical
`
`support and repair services for the Accused Instrumentality to Acronis’s customers.
`26.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has had knowledge of the ‘530 patent since at
`
`least the filing of this Complaint or shortly thereafter, and on information and belief, Acronis
`
`knew of the ‘530 patent and knew of its infringement, including by way of this lawsuit.
`27.
`
`Upon information and belief, Acronis’s affirmative acts of making, using, and
`
`selling the Accused Instrumentalities, and providing implementation services and technical
`
`support to users of the Accused Instrumentalities, have induced and continue to induce users of
`
`the Accused Instrumentalities to use them in their normal and customary way to infringe Claim 1
`
`of the ‘530 patent by making or using a system comprising: a memory device; and a data
`
`accelerator, wherein said data accelerator is coupled to said memory device, a data stream is
`
`received by said data accelerator in received form, said data stream includes a first data block
`
`and a second data block, said data stream is compressed by said data accelerator to provide a
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 10 of 24
`
`
`
`compressed data stream by compressing said first data block with a first compression technique
`
`and said second data block with a second compression technique, said first and second
`
`compression techniques are different, said compressed data stream is stored on said memory
`
`device, said compression and storage occurs faster than said data stream is able to be stored on
`
`said memory device in said received form, a first data descriptor is stored on said memory device
`
`indicative of said first compression technique, and said first descriptor is utilized to decompress
`
`the portion of said compressed data stream associated with said first data block. For example,
`
`Acronis explains to customers the benefits of using the Accused Instrumentality: “One of the key
`
`capabilities of the Acronis storage node is deduplication. Deduplication technology helps reduce
`
`storage costs and network bandwidth utilization by eliminating duplicate data blocks when you
`
`back up and transfer data. Acronis Backup Advanced deduplication helps you to: 1. Reduce
`
`storage space usage by storing only unique data 2. Eliminate the need to invest in data
`
`deduplication-specific hardware 3. Reduce network load because less data is transferred, leaving
`
`more bandwidth for your production tasks.” See
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 2.
`
`For similar reasons, Acronis also induces its customers to use the Accused Instrumentalities to
`
`infringe other claims of the ‘530 patent. Acronis specifically intended and was aware that these
`
`normal and customary activities would infringe the ‘530 patent. Acronis performed the acts that
`
`constitute induced infringement, and would induce actual infringement, with the knowledge of
`
`the ‘530 patent and with the knowledge, or willful blindness to the probability, that the induced
`
`acts would constitute infringement. On information and belief, Acronis engaged in such
`
`inducement to promote the sales of the Accused Instrumentalities. Accordingly, Acronis has
`
`induced and continues to induce users of the accused products to use the accused products in
`
`their ordinary and customary way to infringe the ‘530 patent, knowing that such use constitutes
`
`infringement of the ‘530 patent.
`28.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality evidently includes the memory device and includes
`
`the data accelerator, wherein said data accelerator is coupled to said memory device. For
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 11 of 24
`
`
`
`example, the Accused Instrumentality must run on hardware containing a memory device. See,
`
`e.g., http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf
`
`at 8 (“you should store the deduplication database and deduplication data store on separate disks
`
`to achieve better performance.”).
`29.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality receives an incoming stream of data. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 4
`
`(“During deduplication, the backup data is split into blocks. Each block’s uniqueness is checked
`
`through a special database, which tracks all the stored blocks’ checksums. Unique blocks are sent
`
`to the storage and duplicates are skipped.”).
`30.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality’s received data stream will evidently consist of more
`
`than one data block. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 4
`
`(“During deduplication, the backup data is split into blocks. Each block’s uniqueness is checked
`
`through a special database, which tracks all the stored blocks’ checksums. Unique blocks are sent
`
`to the storage and duplicates are skipped.”).
`31.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality compresses said data stream to provide a
`
`compressed data stream by compressing said first data block with a first compression technique
`
`and said second data block with a second compression technique. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 5,
`
`10 (“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself. … The Acronis Backup agent
`
`compresses the backed up data before sending it to the server. Hash values for each data block
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 12 of 24
`
`
`
`are calculated before compression. If two equal blocks are compressed with different levels of
`
`compression, they are still recognized as duplicates.”).
`32.
`
`The first (deduplication) and second (compression) compression techniques used
`
`by the Accused Instrumentality described above are necessarily different. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 5,
`
`10 (“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself. … The Acronis Backup agent
`
`compresses the backed up data before sending it to the server. Hash values for each data block
`
`are calculated before compression. If two equal blocks are compressed with different levels of
`
`compression, they are still recognized as duplicates.”).
`33.
`
`After compression, said compressed data stream is stored on said memory device.
`
`See, e.g., http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-
`
`US.pdf at 4 (“Deduplication minimizes storage space by detecting data repetition and storing the
`
`identical data only once. Deduplication reduces network load. During a backup, if data is found
`
`to be a duplicate of data previously backed up, it is not transferred over the network to storage.
`
`… During deduplication, the backup data is split into blocks. Each block’s uniqueness is checked
`
`through a special database, which tracks all the stored blocks’ checksums. Unique blocks are sent
`
`to the storage and duplicates are skipped.”).
`34.
`
`Said compression and storage occurs faster than said data stream is able to be
`
`stored on said memory device in said received form. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 2
`
`(“Deduplication technology helps reduce storage costs and network bandwidth utilization by
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 13 of 24
`
`
`
`eliminating duplicate data blocks when you back up and transfer data. … Acronis Backup
`
`Advanced deduplication helps you to: … 3. Reduce network load because less data is transferred,
`
`leaving more bandwidth for your production tasks.”).
`35.
`
`The Accused Instrumentality would evidently store a first data descriptor on said
`
`memory device indicative of said first compression technique, such as a pointer to a deduplicated
`
`data block, and utilize said first descriptor to decompress the portion of said compressed data
`
`stream associated with said first data block. See, e.g.,
`
`http://dl2.acronis.com/u/pdf/AcronisBackupDeduplication_technical_whitepaper_en-US.pdf at 5,
`
`8-9 (“When performing a backup to a deduplicating vault, the Acronis Backup agent calculates a
`
`fingerprint or a checksum of each data block. This fingerprint or checksum is often called a hash
`
`value. The data block size varies from 1 byte to 256KB for disk-level and file-level backups.
`
`Each file that is less than 256KB is considered a complete data block. Files larger than 256KB
`
`are split into 256KB blocks. Before sending the data block to the vault, the agent queries the
`
`storage node to determine whether the block’s hash value is already stored there. If so, the agent
`
`sends only the hash value; otherwise, it sends the block itself. … The Acronis Backup
`
`Advanced’s Storage Node with a deduplicated vault maintains the deduplication database. The
`
`deduplication database contains the hash values of all data blocks stored in the vault, except for
`
`those that cannot be deduplicated, e.g., encrypted files. During recovery, the Acronis Backup
`
`agent requests the data from the Acronis storage node through a proprietary, secure protocol. The
`
`storage node reads backup data from the vault and if a block is referenced in the deduplication
`
`data store, the storage node reads data from it. For an agent, the recovery process is transparent
`
`and independent of the deduplication.”).
`36.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis also infringes, directly and through induced
`
`infringement, and continues to infringe other claims of the ‘530 patent, for similar reasons as
`
`explained above with respect to Claim 1 of the ‘530 patent.
`37.
`
`On information and belief, use of the Accused Instrumentality in its ordinary and
`
`customary fashion results in infringement of the methods claimed by the ‘530 patent.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 14 of 24
`
`
`
`38.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused Instrumentalities, and touting the benefits of using the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities’ compression features, Acronis has injured Realtime and is liable to Realtime
`
`for infringement of the ‘530 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`39.
`
`As a result of Acronis’s infringement of the ‘530 patent, Plaintiff Realtime is
`
`entitled to monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Acronis’s infringement,
`
`but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Acronis,
`
`together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`
`
`COUNT III
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,116,908
`
`40.
`
`Plaintiff Realtime realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-39 above,
`
`as if fully set forth herein.
`41.
`
`Plaintiff Realtime is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No.
`
`9,116,908 (“the ‘908 Patent”) entitled “System and methods for accelerated data storage and
`
`retrieval.” The ‘908 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office on August 25, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ‘908 Patent is included as
`
`Exhibit C.
`42.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has offered for sale, sold and/or imported into
`
`the United States Acronis products that infringe the ‘908 patent, and continues to do so. By way
`
`of illustrative example, these infringing products include, without limitation, Acronis’s products
`
`and services, e.g., Acronis Backup Advanced, including version 11.7 thereof, and all versions
`
`and variations thereof since the issuance of the ‘908 patent (“Accused Instrumentality”).
`43.
`
`On information and belief, Acronis has directly infringed and continues to
`
`infringe the ‘908 patent, for example, through its own use and testing of the Accused
`
`Instrumentality, which constitutes a system comprising: a memory device; and a data accelerator
`
`configured to compress: (i) a first data block with a first compression technique to provide a first
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 15 of 24
`
`
`
`compressed data block; and (ii)