UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:12-CV-1352 (GTS/TWD)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`VIEW 360 SOLUTIONS, LLC,
`
` Plaintiff,
`v.
`
`GOOGLE, INC.,
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF VIEW 360 SOLUTIONS, LLC’S
`FIRST AMENDED L.P.R. 3.1 AND 3.2 DISCLOSURES
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to L.P.R. 3.1 and 3.2, Plaintiff View 360 Solutions LLC (“View 360”) submits
`
`the following first amended disclosures.
`
`L.P.R. 3.1: Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions
`
`(a)
`
`View 360 alleges that the following claims in the patents-in-suit have been and
`
`continue to be infringed by Google, Inc. (“Google”) both directly (35 U.S.C. § 271(a)) and
`
`indirectly (35 U.S.C. § 271(b)).
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,157,385
`
`6,731,284
`
`6,243,099
`
`6,271,853
`
`7,542,035
`
`6,252,603
`
`6,323,862
`
`Asserted Claims
`
`1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 13
`
`1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26 and 27
`
`1, 3, 4, 5, 11, and 13
`
`1, 3, 4, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19 and 22
`
`53, 54, 69, 73, 78, 80, 82, 83, 84, 86, 89, 98, 102, 105, 113, 115, 118,
`119, 120, 121 and 123
`
`1, 12, 14, 17 and 18
`
`22, 26, 27, 28, and 37
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:12-CV-1352 (GTS/TWD)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`VIEW 360 SOLUTIONS, LLC,
`
` Plaintiff,
`v.
`
`GOOGLE, INC.,
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF VIEW 360 SOLUTIONS, LLC’S
`FIRST AMENDED L.P.R. 3.1 AND 3.2 DISCLOSURES
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to L.P.R. 3.1 and 3.2, Plaintiff View 360 Solutions LLC (“View 360”) submits
`
`the following first amended disclosures.
`
`L.P.R. 3.1: Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions
`
`(a)
`
`View 360 alleges that the following claims in the patents-in-suit have been and
`
`continue to be infringed by Google, Inc. (“Google”) both directly (35 U.S.C. § 271(a)) and
`
`indirectly (35 U.S.C. § 271(b)).
`
`U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,157,385
`
`6,731,284
`
`6,243,099
`
`6,271,853
`
`7,542,035
`
`6,252,603
`
`6,323,862
`
`Asserted Claims
`
`1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 13
`
`1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26 and 27
`
`1, 3, 4, 5, 11, and 13
`
`1, 3, 4, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19 and 22
`
`53, 54, 69, 73, 78, 80, 82, 83, 84, 86, 89, 98, 102, 105, 113, 115, 118,
`119, 120, 121 and 123
`
`1, 12, 14, 17 and 18
`
`22, 26, 27, 28, and 37
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`8,077,176
`
`1, 4, 12, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21
`
`(b)
`
`View 360 alleges the Google has, and continues to, directly and indirectly infringe
`
`
`
`
`each Asserted Claim via Google Street View. To the extent Google contends that a third-party
`
`performs any of the steps in the asserted method claims, View 360 alleges that such third-
`
`party(ies) perform such steps under the direction and control of Google. As a result, Google
`
`would still directly infringe such claims pursuant to the theory of joint infringement.
`
`
`
`(c)
`
`Claim charts detailing Google’s infringement of the Asserted Claims are attached
`
`hereto.
`
`
`
`(d)
`
`View 360’s allegation of indirect infringement is offered as an alternative to its
`
`direct infringement theory. View 360 contends that Google has indirectly infringed each
`
`Asserted Claim via inducing end users of Google Street View to use Google Street View.
`
`Google instructs and encourages end users to use Google Street View. When a user enters an
`
`address into Google Street View or Google Maps, Google provides the user a thumbnail image
`
`on the left side of the screen that can be used to launch Street View. D. Martin Decl. ¶13 (May
`
`31, 2012) (Case No. 2:10-cv-07747, C.D. Cal.). Users can also launch Street View “by selecting
`
`Street View from a right-click drop down menu, by zooming into the map close enough to
`
`trigger Street View, or by clicking the thumbnail on the left of the screen for Street View.” Id. at
`
`¶ 14. View 360’s investigation into Google’s practices of inducing end users to use Google
`
`Street View is ongoing and discovery in this matter has only recently begun. View 360 will
`
`likely have additional information in support of its indirect infringement allegations after
`
`discovery has concluded in this matter.
`
`
`
`(e)
`
`Based on its current understanding of the claim language and publicly available
`
`information concerning Google Street View, and without notice of any non-infringement
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`position from Google, View 360 asserts that Google literally infringes each Asserted Claim.
`
`View 360 further alleges that Google infringes each Asserted Claim under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents. In other words, Google Street View performs substantially the same function, in
`
`substantially the same way, to achieve substantially the same result, as the limitations of the
`
`inventions claimed in the Asserted Claims.
`
`
`
`As the parties have not yet finalized disputed claim limitations, and the Court has not yet
`
`construed the Asserted Claims, View 360 reserves the right to amend its theory under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents and its infringement contentions as necessary in accord with the Local
`
`Patent Rules.
`
`
`
`(f)
`
`Each Asserted Claim of U.S. Patent No. 6,157,385 and U.S. Patent No. 6,731,284
`
`is entitled to a priority date at least as early as May 10, 1991. Each Asserted Claim of U.S.
`
`Patent Nos. 6,243,099, 6,271,853, 7,542,035, 6,252,603, 6,323,862 and 8,077,176 is entitled to a
`
`priority date at least as early as May 31, 1996.
`
`
`
`(g)
`
`View 360 does not have its own apparatus, product, device, process, method, act,
`
`or other instrumentality that practices the claimed invention.
`
`
`
`(h)
`
`At this time View 360 has not alleged willful infringement. In accord with L.P.R.
`
`3.1(h), View 360 will supplement its response as necessary at or prior to the close of fact
`
`discovery.
`
`L.P.R. 3.2: Document Production Accompanying Infringement Disclosure
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`At this time View 360 is not aware of any documents responsive to (a).
`
`See documents previously produced numbered Oxaal000001-Oxaal002045. View
`
`360’s investigation into documents responsive to L.P.R. 3.2(b) is ongoing. View 360 will
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`produce non-privileged responsive documents as they become known and available and will
`
`supplement this response accordingly.
`
`(c)
`
`See documents previously produced numbered VIEW360_000188-
`
`VIEW360_002235, VIEW360_002615-VIEW360_003462.
`
`(d)
`
`See documents previously produced numbered VIEW360_002236-
`
`VIEW360_002277, VIEW360_002554-VIEW360_002580, VIEW360_003593 -
`
`VIEW360_003628.
`
`(e)
`
`Not applicable. See response to L.P.R. 3.1(g).
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`DATED: June 10, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Timothy E. Grochocinski
`Timothy E. Grochocinski
`Aaron W. Purser
`INNOVALAW, P.C.
`1900 Ravinia Place
`Orland Park, Illinois 60462
`P. 708-675-1975
`teg@innovalaw.com
`apurser@innovalaw.com
`
`Anthony G. Simon
`Benjamin A. Askew
`Michael P. Kella
`THE SIMON LAW FIRM, P.C.
`800 Market Street, Suite 1700
`Saint Louis, Missouri 63101
`P. 314-241-2929
`asimon@simonlawpc.com
`baskew@simonlawpc.com
`mkella@simonlawpc.com
`
`Daniel M. Sleasman
`LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL SLEASMAN
`One Crumitie Road
`Albany, New York 12211
`P. 518-433-0518
`dmslaw@nycap.rr.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`VIEW 360 SOLUTIONS, LLC
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing was served on counsel for
`
`
`
`
`Defendant via electronic mail on June 10, 2013.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Timothy E. Grochocinski
`Timothy E. Grochocinski
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
