EXHIBIT 1009
`
`EXHIBIT 1009
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 8395
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Civil Action No. 13-cv-1635-LPS
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`NEXTEL OPERATIONS, INC.; SPRINT
`SPECTRUM L.P.; BOOST MOBILE,
`LLC; AND VIRGIN MOBILE USA, L.P.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s Order dated March 26, 2013 (Dkt. 59), Plaintiff Intellectual
`
`Ventures II LLC, for its Third Amended Complaint against Defendants Nextel Operations, Inc.
`
`and Sprint Spectrum L.P. (d/b/a/ Sprint PCS), Boost Mobile, LLC and Virgin Mobile USA, L.P.
`
`(collectively, “Sprint”) hereby alleges as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal
`
`place of business located in Bellevue, Washington.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant Nextel Operations, Inc. (“Nextel”) is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Parkway,
`
`Overland Park, Kansas 66251.
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 1
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 8396
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Sprint Spectrum L.P. d/b/a/ Sprint PCS (“Sprint PCS”) is a Delaware
`
`limited partnership with its principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park,
`
`Kansas 66251.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Boost Mobile, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its
`
`principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Pkwy, Overland Park, KS 66251.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant Virgin Mobile USA, L.P. is a Delaware limited partnership with its
`
`principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Pkwy, Overland Park, KS 66251.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`6.
`
`This is a civil action for the infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,115,737 and U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,339,352 (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”) under the Patent Laws of the United
`
`States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States,
`
`including 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq.
`
`8.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Sprint because it has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and has placed infringing products
`
`into the stream of commerce with the knowledge and/or understanding that such products are
`
`used and sold in this District. These acts have caused and continue to cause injury to Intellectual
`
`Ventures II within the District. Sprint derives substantial revenue from the sale of infringing
`
`services and products distributed within the District, and/or expects or should reasonably expect
`
`its actions to have consequences within the District, and derives substantial revenue from
`
`interstate and international commerce.
`
`2
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 2
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 8397
`
`9.
`
`Sprint maintains places of business within the District from which it sells
`
`products or services to residents of the District. Additionally, Sprint provides
`
`telecommunications services to customers through base stations, switching equipment, and other
`
`components of their telecommunications networks, which are located in the District.
`
`10.
`
`Further, Defendants are subject to this Court's jurisdiction by virtue of their
`
`incorporation in Delaware and their availing themselves of the laws and protections of this
`
`District
`
`11.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b).
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`Paragraphs 1-9 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
`
`On September 5, 2000, United States Patent No. 6,115,737 (“the ’737 Patent”),
`
`titled “System And Method For Accessing Customer Contact Services Over A Network,” was
`
`duly and lawfully issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). The ’737
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
`
`14.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II owns all substantial right, title, and interest in the ’737
`
`Patent, and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past
`
`infringement.
`
`15.
`
`On August 16, 1994, United States Patent No. 5,339,352 (“the ’352 Patent”),
`
`titled “Directory Assistance Call Completion Via Mobile Systems,” was duly and lawfully issued
`
`by the PTO. The ’352 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
`
`16.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II owns all substantial right, title, and interest in the ’352
`
`Patent, and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past
`
`infringement.
`
`3
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 3
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 8398
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`Intellectual Ventures
`
`17.
`
`Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC (“Intellectual Ventures”) was founded in
`
`2000. Since its founding, Intellectual Ventures has been deeply involved in the business of
`
`invention. Intellectual Ventures creates inventions and files patent applications for those
`
`inventions; collaborates with others to develop and patent inventions; and acquires and licenses
`
`patents from individual inventors, universities, and other institutions. A significant aspect of
`
`Intellectual Ventures’ business is managing Intellectual Ventures II.
`
`18.
`
`Intellectual Ventures’ business includes purchasing important inventions from
`
`individual inventors and institutions and then licensing the inventions to those who need them.
`
`Through this business, Intellectual Ventures allows inventors to reap a financial reward from
`
`their innovations, a frequently difficult task for individual inventors. To date, Intellectual
`
`Ventures has built a portfolio of more than 35,000 assets and more than 3,000 of those patents
`
`and patent applications are the result of Intellectual Ventures’ own invention efforts, both in-
`
`house and with Intellectual Ventures’ inventor network. Intellectual Ventures has paid
`
`individual inventors more than $400 million for their inventions. Intellectual Ventures, in turn,
`
`has earned more than $2 billion by licensing these patents to some of the world’s most
`
`innovative and successful technology companies who continue to use them to make computer
`
`equipment, software, semiconductor devices, consumer products, and a host of other products.
`
`19.
`
`Intellectual Ventures also develops its own inventions. Intellectual Ventures has a
`
`staff of scientists and engineers who develop ideas in a broad range of fields, including
`
`agriculture, computer hardware, life sciences, medical devices, semiconductors, and software.
`
`Intellectual Ventures has invested millions of dollars developing such ideas and has filed
`
`hundreds of patent applications on its inventions every year, making it one of the top patent filers
`
`4
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 4
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 8399
`
`in the world. Intellectual Ventures also has invested in laboratory facilities to assist with the
`
`development and testing of new ideas.
`
`20.
`
`Intellectual Ventures also develops inventions by collaborating with inventors and
`
`research institutions around the world. For example, Intellectual Ventures has developed
`
`inventions by selecting a technical challenge, requesting proposals for inventions to solve the
`
`challenge from inventors and institutions, selecting the most promising ideas, rewarding the
`
`inventors and institutions for their contributions, and filing patent applications on the ideas.
`
`Intellectual Ventures has invested millions of dollars in this way and has created a network of
`
`more than 3000 inventors worldwide.
`
`The National Telecommunications Network
`
`21.
`
`Defendants are in the business of selling and offering for sale mobile phones and
`
`wireless phone services to customers throughout the United States, including the state of
`
`Delaware.
`
`22.
`
`Other wireless service carriers and related entities offer similar products and
`
`services, including AT&T Mobility LLC (d/b/a AT&T Mobility), AT&T Mobility II LLC (d/b/a
`
`AT&T Mobility), New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. (d/b/a AT&T Mobility) (AT&T
`
`Mobility LLC, AT&T Mobility II LLC, and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. collectively,
`
`“AT&T Mobility”), SBC Internet Services, Inc. (d/b/a AT&T Entertainment Services, AT&T
`
`Internet Services, and Pacific Bell Internet Services), Wayport, Inc., (d/b/a AT&T Wi-Fi
`
`Services) (AT&T Mobility, SBC Internet Services, Inc., and Wayport, Inc. collectively,
`
`“AT&T”); T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”); United States Cellular Corporation, and
`
`Telephone and Data Systems, Inc., (United States Cellular Corporation and Telephone and Data
`
`5
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 5
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 8400
`
`Systems, Inc., collectively “U.S. Cellular”). As used herein, “Carriers” will refer to AT&T
`
`Mobility, T-Mobile, Sprint, and U.S. Cellular.
`
`23.
`
`Collectively, the Carriers have created an integrated national network for the
`
`provision of wireless telecommunication services to their customers. Through bilateral
`
`agreements, participation in standard bodies and cooperation in the adoption of compatible
`
`technology, the Carriers have created a national telecommunications network allowing customers
`
`of each Carrier to communicate with each other over a vast wireless network. The national
`
`wireless network is, in effect, one giant data communications network, from which each of the
`
`Carriers gains significant advantage and revenue.
`
`24.
`
`The Carriers have entered into a series of inter-carrier agreements through which
`
`they act as the agents for each other, and are contractually obligated to each other, in connection
`
`with the provision of wireless telecommunication services and have jointly created an infringing
`
`system. By way of example:
`
`25.
`
`AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless (on information and belief, entities which
`
`became AT&T Mobility), Nextel, Sprint PCS, T-Mobile, and U.S. Cellular agreed to create a
`
`system for the transfer of MMS messages through a national inter-carrier system. An MMS
`
`message is a multimedia message, containing a picture, video or multimedia attachment, and
`
`which can be sent from a mobile phone to another mobile phone, and there are billions of such
`
`messages sent each year.
`
`26.
`
`CTIA-The Wireless Association® is an international nonprofit membership
`
`organization that has represented the wireless communications industry since 1984. See
`
`http://www.ctia.org/aboutCTIA/. Pursuant to guidelines agreed to by the Carriers, they created
`
`a system to enable the transfer of “phone number addressed mobile-to-mobile MMS messages
`
`6
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 6
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 8401
`
`across participating wireless carrier networks in the U.S.” Inter-Carrier MMS Messaging
`
`Guidelines, Feature Set & Interfaces, Revision: 1.0, Date: October 21, 2004 (attached as
`
`Exhibit P) at p.6.
`
`27.
`
`As stated in the Inter-Carrier MMS Messaging Guidelines: “The purpose of
`
`MMS Interoperability is to ensure that carriers can pass mobile originated Multimedia Messages
`
`(MMS) across participating carriers’ networks. The group’s objective is to identify and define
`
`the involved interfaces, and to agree upon a common feature set that will be supported by all
`
`participating carriers.” Id.
`
`28.
`
`On July 7, 2005, T-Mobile USA Inc., Cingular Wireless L.L.C., and Sprint PCS
`
`announced that their networks were now MMS interoperable. “T-Mobile USA Inc. users can
`
`exchange pictures and video clips with subscribers of both Cingular Wireless L.L.C. and Sprint
`
`PCS, the three carriers announced.” See T-Mobile USA, Cingular make MMS interoperability
`
`announcements, located at http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20050707/sub/t-mobile-usa-
`
`cingular-make-mms-interoperability-announcements/ (attached as Exhibit Q).
`
`29.
`
`In a press release on July 7, 2005 T-Mobile explained further the agreement with
`
`Sprint: “It's called Multimedia Messaging Services (MMS) interoperability. It allows T-Mobile
`
`and Sprint customers to send and receive picture messages across carriers.” See T-Mobile USA
`
`and Sprint Make it a Snap for Customers to Share Pictures and Text Messages - Sprint and T-
`
`Mobile Customers can use Wireless Phones to Exchange Picture Messages, T-Mobile press
`
`release, July 7, 2005, located at http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/articles/t-mobile-Sprint-MMS
`
`(attached as Exhibit R).
`
`30.
`
`Upon information and belief, AT&T Mobility has agreed with the other Carriers
`
`to deliver their MMS messages to AT&T Mobility’s customers pursuant to the CTIA Guidelines.
`
`7
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 7
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 8402
`
`31.
`
`Upon information and belief, U.S. Cellular has agreed with the other Carriers to
`
`deliver their MMS messages to U.S. Cellular’s customers pursuant to the CTIA Guidelines.
`
`32.
`
`The Carriers act as agents for each other, and are contractually obligated to each
`
`other, in the transmission of inter-carrier MMS messages. Each wireless carrier thus facilitates
`
`and encourages the others to engage in infringing acts in relation to the transfer of MMS
`
`messages.
`
`33.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Carriers transfer traffic between each other,
`
`thereby acting as agents for the completion of calls pursuant to their contractual obligations in
`
`their roaming agreements. In particular, upon information and belief, starting at least as early as
`
`April 2003, T-Mobile and AT&T Mobility entered into one or more roaming agreement which
`
`allow T-Mobile wireless customers to complete calls through the AT&T Mobility’s network, and
`
`AT&T Mobility customers to complete calls through the T-Mobile wireless network. Each
`
`wireless carrier which completes calls for the other acts as an agent for the other, and fulfills
`
`their contractual obligations, in completing the calls.
`
`34.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Carriers share amongst each other phone
`
`numbers and identification information which allows them to identify whether a call originating
`
`in one carrier’s network is to be completed in another carrier’s network and routing information
`
`which allows the smooth transfer of calls, SMS text messages and MMS messages between
`
`networks. Carriers update this information on a regular basis to insure the smooth transfer of
`
`calls between carriers.
`
`35.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Carriers have agreed bilaterally or through
`
`participation in standards bodies to use Intellectual Ventures’ patented technology in violation of
`
`Intellectual Ventures’ patent rights.
`
`8
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 8
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 8403
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Infringement of the ’352 Patent)
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`Paragraphs 1-33 are incorporated by reference as if fully restated herein.
`
`Sprint has infringed the ’352 Patent, literally and/or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by using or performing one or more of the method claims without authority and in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Among the infringing services is Sprint’s 411 service for
`
`wireless carriers.
`
`38.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II has suffered damage as a result of Sprint’s infringement
`
`of the ’352 Patent.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(Infringement of the ’737 Patent)
`
`39.
`
`40.
`
`Paragraphs 1-36 are incorporated by reference as if fully restated herein.
`
`Sprint, either alone or in conjunction with others, has infringed the ’737 Patent,
`
`literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by using or performing one or more of the
`
`method claims without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Among the infringing
`
`services is Sprint’s customer website, which enables customers to make changes to their service
`
`plans and/or personal information over the Internet.
`
`41.
`
`Sprint infringes the ’737 Patent alone through the operation and functionality of
`
`its website, through which its customers can make changes to their service plans and/or personal
`
`information over the Internet. Alternatively, Sprint and its customers, who use Sprint’s website
`
`to make changes to their service plans and/or personal information over the Internet, jointly
`
`infringe the ’737 Patent. Sprint exercises control and direction over the entire performance of
`
`9
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 9
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 10 of 12 PageID #: 8404
`
`the claimed method such that the performance of every step is controlled by Sprint, who acts as a
`
`master-mind.
`
`42.
`
`By way of non-limiting example, when a Sprint customer accesses his or her
`
`account online, Sprint infringes the ’737 Patent. Sprint induces its subscribers to perform one or
`
`more steps of the claimed method to access and/or modify customer-specific information, and
`
`Sprint performs the remaining steps of the method.
`
`43.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II has suffered damage as a result of Sprint’s infringement of
`
`the ’737 Patent.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Intellectual Ventures II respectfully requests the following relief:
`
`a)
`
`b)
`
`c)
`
`d)
`
`A judgment that U.S. Patent Nos. 6,115,737 and 5,339,352 are valid and
`
`enforceable.
`
`A judgment that Sprint has infringed the ’737 Patent;
`
`A judgment that Sprint has infringed the ’352 Patent;
`
`An order enjoining Sprint and its officers, agents, servants and employees,
`
`privies, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from further
`
`infringement of said patents;
`
`e)
`
`A judgment that Intellectual Ventures II be awarded all appropriate damages
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 284 for Sprint’s past infringement, and any continuing or future
`
`infringement of the Patents-in-Suit, up until the date such judgment is entered,
`
`including pre and post judgment interest, costs, and disbursements as justified
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 284 and, if necessary to adequately compensate Intellectual
`
`Ventures II for Sprint’s infringement, an accounting:
`
`10
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 10
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 8405
`
`i)
`
`that this case be declared exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 285 and that Intellectual Ventures II be awarded its reasonable
`
`attorneys’ fees that it incurs in prosecuting this action;
`
`ii)
`
`that Intellectual Ventures II be awarded costs, and expenses that it incurs
`
`in prosecuting this action; and
`
`iii)
`
`that Intellectual Ventures II be awarded such further relief at law or in
`
`equity as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`11
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 11
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352
`
`

`
`Case 1:13-cv-01635-LPS Document 172 Filed 09/23/14 Page 12 of 12 PageID #: 8406
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`DATED: September 23, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`Martin J. Black -- LEAD ATTORNEY
`martin.black@dechert.com
`DECHERT LLP
`Cira Centre 2929 Arch Street
`Philadelphia, PA 19104
`(215) 994-4000
`
`Jeffrey B. Plies
`jeffrey.plies@dechert.com
`DECHERT LLP
`300 W. 6th Street
`Suite 2010
`Austin, TX 78701
`(512) 394-3000
`
`Stephen J. Akerley
`stephen.akerley@dechert.com
`Justin F. Boyce
`justin.boyce@dechert.com
`DECHERT LLP
`2440 W. El Camino Real Suite 700
`Mountain View, CA 94040-1499
`(650) 813-4800
`
`Intellectual Ventures II hereby demands trial by jury on all claims and issues so triable.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FARNAN LLP
`
`
`By: /s/ Brian E. Farnan
`Joseph J. Farnan, III (Bar No. 3945)
`Brian E. Farnan (Bar No. 4089)
`919 North Market Street, 12th Floor
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801
`(302) 777-0300
`(302) 777-0301 (Fax)
`bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Intellectual Ventures II LLC
`
`12
`
`Sprint Exhibit 1009, p. 12
`Petition for CBM Review of Patent No. 5,339,352