Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 1 of 20
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`NETSOC, LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`CHEGG INC.
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-10262
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`NetSoc, LLC (“NetSoc”) files this Original Complaint and demand for jury trial seeking
`
`relief from patent infringement of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,978,107 by Chegg Inc., alleging
`
`as follows:
`
`
`
`I.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1. Plaintiff NetSoc is a Texas Limited Liability Company with its principal place of business
`
`located in Harris County, Texas.
`
`2. On information and belief, Chegg Inc. (“Chegg”) is a domestic corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware, with a principal place of business located in New York, New
`
`York. Chegg may be served through its registered agent at Corporation Service Company, 80
`
`State Street, Albany, New York 12207-2541. On information and belief, Chegg sells and offers
`
`to sell products and services throughout New York, including in this judicial district, and
`
`introduces products and services that perform infringing methods or processes into the stream of
`
`commerce knowing that they would be sold in New York and this judicial district.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 1
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`NETSOC, LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`CHEGG INC.
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-10262
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`NetSoc, LLC (“NetSoc”) files this Original Complaint and demand for jury trial seeking
`
`relief from patent infringement of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,978,107 by Chegg Inc., alleging
`
`as follows:
`
`
`
`I.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1. Plaintiff NetSoc is a Texas Limited Liability Company with its principal place of business
`
`located in Harris County, Texas.
`
`2. On information and belief, Chegg Inc. (“Chegg”) is a domestic corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware, with a principal place of business located in New York, New
`
`York. Chegg may be served through its registered agent at Corporation Service Company, 80
`
`State Street, Albany, New York 12207-2541. On information and belief, Chegg sells and offers
`
`to sell products and services throughout New York, including in this judicial district, and
`
`introduces products and services that perform infringing methods or processes into the stream of
`
`commerce knowing that they would be sold in New York and this judicial district.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 1
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 2 of 20
`
`
`
`II.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3. This Court has original subject-matter jurisdiction over the entire action pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because Plaintiff’s claim arises under an Act of Congress relating to
`
`patents, namely, 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`4. This Court also has original subject-matter jurisdiction over the entire action pursuant to
`
`28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) because Plaintiff is a limited liability company organized under the laws
`
`of the State of Texas and Defendant is a Delaware Corporation with a physical place of business
`
`located in New York, New York. The matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000,
`
`exclusive of interest and costs.
`
`5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because: (i) Defendant is present
`
`within or has minimum contacts within the State of New York and this judicial district; (ii)
`
`Defendant has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the State of
`
`New York and in this judicial district; and (iii) Plaintiff’s cause of action arises directly from
`
`Defendant’s business contacts and other activities in the State of New York and in this judicial
`
`district.
`
`6. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1400(b). Defendant has
`
`committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business in this District.1
`
`Further, venue is proper because Defendant conducts substantial business in this forum, directly
`
`or through intermediaries, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringements alleged herein; and
`
`(ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses of conduct and/or
`
`
`1 Chegg, Inc. advertises for employees within zipcode 10016 and maintains on its website and in
`its SEC filings at chegg.com that it has an office in New York, New York.
`
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 3 of 20
`
`deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to individuals in New York and
`
`this District.
`
`III.
`
`INFRINGEMENT (’107 Patent)
`
`
`7. On May 22, 2018, U.S. Patent No. 9,978,107 (“the ’107 patent”, attached as Exhibit A)
`
`entitled “Method and System for Establishing and Using a Social Network to Facilitate People in
`
`Life Issues” was duly and legally issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. NetSoc, LLC
`
`owns the ’107 patent by assignment.
`
`8. The ’107 patent relates generally to a method and system for establishing and using a social
`
`network to facilitate people in life issues.
`
`A. Defendant
`
`9. Chegg maintains, operates, and administers a website at www.chegg.com that infringes
`
`one or more claims of the ‘107 patent, including at least claims 1-11, literally or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents. Defendant put the inventions claimed by the ‘107 Patent into service (i.e., used
`
`them); but for Defendant’s actions, the claimed-inventions embodiments involving Defendant’s
`
`products and services would never have been put into service. Defendant’s acts complained of
`
`herein caused those claimed-invention embodiments as a whole to perform, and Defendant’s
`
`procurement of monetary and commercial benefit from it.
`
`10. Support for the allegations of infringement may be found in the following preliminary
`
`table:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 4 of 20
`
`Claim 6
`
`Accused Product (or Service)
`
`6. A computer system
`comprising:
`
`Plaintiff contends that Chegg provides computer system that is, one or
`more servers or databases to provide Chegg Tutors service.
`
`
`
`Attachment 1 (How Chegg Tutors works (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`Plaintiff contends that by using one or more servers or databases (which
`contain processors and memory), Chegg stores and maintains data of
`one or more participants or individuals along with their information.
`
`
`
`
`
`Attachment 1 (How Chegg Tutors works (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`a memory to store a
`list comprising a
`plurality of
`participants, wherein
`each participant in the
`plurality of
`participants
`corresponds to one or
`more individuals,
`wherein the list also
`includes information
`associated with at least
`one of each participant
`or the one or more
`individuals that
`correspond to each
`participant;
`
`one or more
`processors that
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 5 of 20
`
`execute instructions
`to:
`
`maintain the list;
`
`Attachment 2 (Find a Programming tutor (Webpage, 2018)) at 2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Chegg stores and maintains data of plurality of candidates or
`participants along with their information.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`present a user with an
`interface from which
`the user makes a
`selection of a category
`
`Attachment 3 (Raj K. (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`Plaintiff contends that by using Chegg Tutors service, user is presented
`with an interface for making a selection of a category from a plurality of
`categories.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 5
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 6 of 20
`
`User can select a category (for example, “Programming Tutors”) from a
`plurality of categories by using the interface.
`
`from a plurality of
`categories;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attachment 4 (Online tutors ready to help 24/7 (Webpage, 2018)) at
`5 and 6.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Another example of selection of a category from a plurality of categories
`
`[Snapshot taken from site:www.chegg.com/tutors/]
`
`
`
`
` 6
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 7 of 20
`
`Plaintiff contends that based on the selection of the category, some of
`the information associated with each of multiple participants from the
`plurality of
`
`participants is displayed to the user which matches the selection of the
`category by the user. Also, contact information of each of the multiple
`participants is shielded from the user.
`
`Selection of the category by the user (for example, “Programming
`Tutors” in this case)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`in response to
`receiving the selection
`of the category by the
`user, present, for the
`user, some of the
`information associated
`with each of multiple
`participants from the
`plurality of
`participants which
`match the selection of
`the category by the
`user, while shielding
`contact information
`associated with each
`of the multiple
`participants;
`
`Attachment 4 (Online tutors ready to help 24/7 (Webpage, 2018)) at
`5.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 7
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 8 of 20
`
`Attachment 2 (Find a Programming tutor (Webpage, 2018)) at 2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Some of the information associated with each participant from the
`plurality of participants is displayed to the user matching the selection
`of the category, while the contact information remains hidden from the
`user.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 8
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 9 of 20
`
`Id. at 3.
`
`The contact information of each participant remains hidden from the user
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attachment 3 (Raj K. (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 9
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 10 of 20
`
`wherein displaying
`some of the
`information associated
`with each of the
`multiple participants is
`based at least in part
`on a rating of
`individual participants
`in the plurality of
`participants;
`
`Plaintiff contends that the information associated with each of the
`multiple participants is displayed based on a rating or ranking of
`individual participant in the plurality of participants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Information of each participant is displayed based on a rating or
`ranking of individual participant in the plurality of participants. For
`example, tutors with status as “Online” (With Green Icon) or “Ready to
`teach now!” (With Green Icon including Check Mark) are shown first in
`
`the ranking because they will most likely respond to any user’s inquiry.
`Offline tutors are assigned low rating.
`
`
`
`
`Attachment 2 (Find a Programming tutor (Webpage, 2018)) at 2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 10
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 11 of 20
`
`
`
`
`
`Id. at 3.
`
`Plaintiff contends that user or student can send inquiry message(s) to
`one or
`
`more participants or tutors, while the contact information associated
`with each participant (such as emails, messaging identifiers, etc.)
`remains hidden or shielded from the user.
`
`
`
`enabling the user to
`send an inquiry
`message to one or
`more of the multiple
`participants, while
`shielding the contact
`information from the
`user, the contact
`information including
`any messaging
`identifier that is
`associated with each
`of the one or more
`participants;
`
`
`
`
` 11
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 12 of 20
`
`[Snapshot taken from the
`website:https://www.chegg.com/tutors/Computer-Science-online-
`tutoring/?p=1&filter-subjects=30&filter-gender=]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 12
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 13 of 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`User or student can send inquiry message(s) to one or more
`participants, while the contact information associated with each
`participant (such as emails, messaging identifiers, etc.) remains hidden
`or shielded from the user.
`
`Attachment 3 (Raj K. (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 13
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 14 of 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inquiry message is sent to one or more participants, while the contact
`information remains hidden from the user or student.
`
`[Snapshot taken from website:
`https://www.chegg.com/tutors/online-tutors/Raj-K-199228/?sid=30
`and Clicking over the “Send message”]
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 14
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 15 of 20
`
`Plaintiff contends that response-time of each participant who received
`the message from the user is tracked.
`
`tracking a response
`time of each of the one
`or more participants
`who received the
`message from the
`user; and
`
`Response time
`of each
`participant is
`tracked who
`receives the
`message from
`the user.
`
`[Snapshot taken after creating user’s profile in chegg.com]
`
`
`
`Response time of each
`participant is tracked
`
`
`
`Attachment 3 (Raj K. (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 15
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 16 of 20
`
`updating the rating
`associated with each
`of the one or more
`participants based at
`least in part on the
`tracked response time.
`
`Plaintiff contends that rating of each participant is updated based on his
`or her response-time. For example, in case of Chegg Tutors, once the
`user sends the inquiry message, each participant’s response time is
`tracked and each participant’s rating gets updated based on his or her
`response-time.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Response time of each participant is tracked based on which his rating is
`updated
`
`Attachment 3 (Raj K. (Webpage, 2018)) at 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 16
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 17 of 20
`
`
`
`Attachment 2 (Find a Programming tutor (Webpage, 2018)) at 2.
`
`
`
`Response-time is a key parameter in deciding or updating ranking or
`rating of each participant. For example, those participants with quick
`response time, they are given preference and are assigned higher
`rating than other participants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 17
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 18 of 20
`
`
`
`Id. at 3.
`
`
`
`• These allegations of infringement are preliminary and are therefore subject to change.
`
`11. Chegg Inc. has and continues to induce infringement. Chegg Inc. has actively encouraged
`
`or instructed others (e.g., its customers and/or the customers of its related companies), and
`
`continues to do so, on how to use its products and services (e.g., online tutoring services on the
`
`Internet] and related services that provide online tutoring services across the Internet such as to
`
`cause infringement of claims 1–11 of the ’107 patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`Moreover, Chegg Inc. has known of the ’107 patent and the technology underlying it from at least
`
`the date of issuance of the patent.
`
`12. Chegg Inc. has and continues to contributorily infringe. Chegg Inc. has actively encouraged
`
`or instructed others (e.g., its customers and/or the customers of its related companies), and
`
`
`
`
` 18
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 19 of 20
`
`continues to do so, on how to use its products and services (e.g., online tutoring services on the
`
`Internet] and related services that provide online tutoring services across the Internet such as to
`
`cause infringement of claims 1–11 of the ’107 patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`Moreover, Chegg Inc. has known of the ’107 patent and the technology underlying it from at least
`
`the date of issuance of the patent.
`
`13. Chegg Inc. has caused and will continue to cause NETSOC damage by direct and indirect
`
`infringement of (including inducing infringement of) the claims of the ’107 patent.
`
`
`NETSOC hereby requests a trial by jury on issues so triable by right.
`
`IV.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`i. WHEREFORE, NETSOC prays for relief as follows:
`
`V.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`a. enter judgment that Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘107 patent through
`
`each of tinder.com; okcupid.com; pof.com; and match.com;
`
`b. award NETSOC damages in an amount sufficient to compensate it for Defendant’s
`
`infringement of the ’107 patent, in an amount no less than a reasonable royalty or
`
`lost profits, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`c. award NETSOC an accounting for acts of infringement not presented at trial and
`
`an award by the Court of additional damage for any such acts of infringement;
`
`d. declare this case to be “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and award NETSOC
`
`its attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred in this action;
`
`
`
`
` 19
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-10262 Document 1 Filed 11/05/18 Page 20 of 20
`
`e. declare Defendant’s infringement to be willful and treble the damages, including
`
`attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred in this action and an increase in the
`
`damage award pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`f. a decree addressing future infringement that either (i) awards a permanent
`
`injunction enjoining Defendant and its agents, servants, employees, affiliates,
`
`divisions, and subsidiaries, and those in association with Defendant from infringing
`
`the claims of the Patents-in-Suit, or (ii) awards damages for future infringement in
`
`lieu of an injunction in an amount consistent with the fact that for future
`
`infringement the Defendant will be an adjudicated infringer of a valid patent, and
`
`trebles that amount in view of the fact that the future infringement will be willful
`
`as a matter of law; and
`
`g. award NETSOC such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Ramey & Schwaller, LLP
`
`By: /s/ David Hoffman
`David Hoffman
`17 Battery Place, Suite 1308
`New York, New York 10004
`(212) 488-1771 (telephone)
`(832) 900-4941 (fax)
`dhoffman@rameyfirm.com
`
`Attorneys for NetSoc, LLC
`
` 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
