Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISON
`
`
`ELBIT SYSTEMS LAND AND C4I LTD. and
`ELBIT SYSTEMS OF AMERICA, LLC,
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 2:15-CV-37
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC,
`BLACK ELK ENERGY OFFSHORE
`OPERATIONS, LLC, BLUETIDE
`COMMUNICATIONS, INC., and HELM
`HOTELS GROUP,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs Elbit Systems Land and C4I Ltd. (“Elbit”) and Elbit Systems of
`
`America, LLC (“Elbit Systems of America”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by their undersigned
`
`attorneys, for their Complaint against defendants Hughes Network Systems, LLC (“Hughes”),
`
`Black Elk Energy Offshore Operations, LLC (“Black Elk”), BlueTide Communications, Inc.
`
`(“BlueTide”), and Helm Hotels Group (“Helm”) (collectively, “Defendants”), hereby allege as
`
`follows, upon actual knowledge with respect to themselves and their own acts, and upon
`
`information and belief as to all other matters:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Elbit is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
`
`Israel. Elbit is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems Ltd., an international defense
`
`
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 1
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 2 of 18 PageID #: 2
`
`electronics company engaged in a wide range of programs throughout the world. Elbit maintains
`
`its principal place of business at 5 HaGavish Street, Netanya, Israel, 4250705.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Elbit Systems of America is a limited liability company organized
`
`and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. Elbit Systems of America is a wholly-
`
`owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems Ltd. Elbit Systems of America maintains its principal place
`
`of business at 4700 Marine Creek Parkway, Fort Worth, Texas, 76179.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Hughes is a limited liability company organized and existing
`
`under the laws of Delaware. Hughes maintains its principal place of business at 11717
`
`Exploration Lane, Germantown, Maryland, 20876. Hughes maintains a registered agent in
`
`Texas, Corporation Service Company, located at 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, TX 78701.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Black Elk is a limited liability company organized and existing
`
`under the laws of Texas. Black Elk maintains its principal place of business at 3100 South
`
`Gessner Road, Suite 215, Houston, TX 77063. Black Elk maintains a registered agent in Texas,
`
`CT Corporation System, located at 1999 Bryan St., Suite 900, Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant BlueTide (d/b/a “BlueTide Communications Corporation”) is a
`
`company organized and existing under the laws of Louisiana. BlueTide maintains its principal
`
`place of business at 200 Cummings Road, Broussard, LA 70518.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant Helm owns and operates five Texas hotels, the Best Western
`
`Premier, Crown Chase Inn & Suites, located at 2450 Brinker Road, Denton, TX 76208, the
`
`Holiday Inn & Suites, McKinney - Fairview, located at 3220 Craig Drive, McKinney, TX 75070,
`
`the Best Western Plus, Monica Royale Inn & Suites, located at 3001 Mustang Crossing,
`
`Greenville, TX 75402, the Holiday Inn Express, Hotel & Suites, located at 2901 Mustang
`
`Crossing, Greenville, TX 75402, and the Best Western Plus, Crown Colony Inn & Suites, located
`
`2
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 2
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 3 of 18 PageID #: 3
`
`at 3211 South 1st St., Lufkin, TX 75901. Helm maintains its principal place of business at PO
`
`Box 789, Sulphur Springs, TX 75483.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement of United States Patent Nos.
`
`6,240,073 (“the ’073 patent”) and 7,245,874 (“the ’874 patent”), arising under the United States
`
`patent laws, Title 35, United States Code, including but not limited to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`8.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States,
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq.
`
`9.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants. Defendants conduct
`
`business in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and throughout the United States.
`
`Further, Defendants have committed and continue to commit acts of patent infringement in this
`
`District and elsewhere in Texas by marketing, selling, offering to sell, and/or using infringing
`
`broadband satellite systems and components, entitling Plaintiffs to relief.
`
`10.
`
`Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and 28
`
`U.S.C. § 1400(b), at least because each defendant has sold, offered to sell, or used the infringing
`
`broadband satellite systems and components in this District pursuant at least to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271(a), 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), and/or 43 U.S.C. § 1333(a).
`
`THE IPOS STANDARD
`
`11.
`
`The claimed invention of the ’073 patent is infringed by broadband
`
`satellite systems that operate according to the Internet Protocol over Satellite (“IPoS”) Standard,
`
`which was ratified as a U.S. Telecommunications Industry Association standard (TIA-1008-
`
`2003) in November 2003. A true and correct copy of a Hughes White Paper describing the IPoS
`
`standard is attached as Exhibit A.
`
`3
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 3
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 4 of 18 PageID #: 4
`
`12.
`
`The IPoS standard specifies architecture and protocols for the transmission
`
`of Internet Protocol (“IP”) packets between a central hub station and remote satellite terminals
`
`using geosynchronous satellites.
`
`13.
`
`The IPoS standard is based upon Defendant Hughes’s “HughesNet®”
`
`two-way satellite system.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant Hughes manufactures and sells broadband satellite systems that
`
`are compliant with the IPoS standard, and components that make up such systems, such as the
`
`Hughes HX/HN broadband satellite systems. A true and correct copy of a Hughes publication
`
`advertising its IPoS-compliant broadband satellite systems is attached as Exhibit B.
`
`15.
`
`Defendant BlueTide is a Louisiana-based company that has partnered with
`
`Hughes to install and manage Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX/HN broadband satellite systems for
`
`individual customers in the specific maritime context. In 2014, BlueTide spun off from
`
`Environmental & Safety Services International, Inc. (“ESSI”), where it had previously performed
`
`these functions for Hughes as the Communications Division of ESSI. A true and correct copy of
`
`a MarineLink news article discussing the relationship between Hughes and ESSI/BlueTide is
`
`attached as Exhibit C. As noted in the article, “[w]ith Hughes as the well-funded and reliable
`
`parent and the Hughes Maritime Broadband network at their disposal, ESSI is arguably the
`
`perfect service provider and conduit to the maritime customer; utilizing U.S. built Hughes hubs
`
`and modems, selling to end users and providing tier one and two support.” Defendant Black Elk,
`
`for example, explained in the article that “the ESSI Deck Vision solution coupled with the
`
`Hughes Maritime Broadband service helps us operate more efficiently than ever.”
`
`16.
`
`Defendant Black Elk, a Houston-based oil and gas company, is a customer
`
`of Hughes and a user of Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX broadband satellite system. A true and
`
`4
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 4
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 5 of 18 PageID #: 5
`
`correct copy of a Hughes publication advertising Black Elk’s use of its broadband satellite
`
`system is attached as Exhibit D. As described in the publication, Hughes and/or ESSI/BlueTide
`
`have worked with Black Elk to implement the Hughes broadband satellite system within Black
`
`Elk’s communications framework, which Hughes describes as the “Hughes Maritime Broadband
`
`solution.” The publication notes that Hughes and ESSI “are equipping Black Elk-operated
`
`production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico with HX broadband satellite routers and providing
`
`high-speed Internet, SCADA, Wi-Fi, Fax, and VHF radio backhaul services,” which Hughes
`
`describes as “a fully managed broadband satellite solution.” Upon information and belief, Black
`
`Elk operates production platforms in Texas waters and in federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico,
`
`including in federal waters adjacent to this District.
`
`17.
`
`Defendant Helm, the owner and operator of five Texas hotels, is a
`
`customer of Hughes and a user of Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX/HN broadband satellite systems.
`
`A true and correct copy of a Hughes publication advertising Helm’s use of its broadband satellite
`
`systems is attached as Exhibit E. As described in the publication, Hughes has worked with Helm
`
`to install a Hughes Digital Concierge, which relies on the Hughes broadband satellite systems, at
`
`least in Helm’s Best Western Premier property in Denton, Texas. The publication notes that
`
`Hughes “manages the interactive touchscreen displays” and “handles the technology and
`
`support.” A true and correct copy of The Best Western Premier’s webpage is also attached as
`
`Exhibit F, in which the hotel displays the Hughes Digital Concierge and notes that its “unique
`
`lobby” comes with a “touchscreen concierge,” which it lists as an amenity.
`
`18.
`
`Upon information and belief, Hughes has sold its IPoS-compliant HX/HN
`
`broadband satellite systems to other customers for use in a variety of contexts throughout the
`
`United States and worldwide, including but not limited to other maritime customers, in addition
`
`5
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 5
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 6 of 18 PageID #: 6
`
`to Defendant Black Elk, for use in federal waters in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. According to a
`
`true and correct copy of an ESSI publication, attached as Exhibit G, ESSI/BlueTide is a
`
`“specialist maritime systems integrator” that carries out the “installation and ongoing support” of
`
`the Hughes system for these maritime customers. The publication notes that Hughes provides
`
`technical support for its maritime customers, and that, “[b]ecause it is a fully-managed service,
`
`Hughes, in partnership with ESSI, can deliver a whole array of equipment” to the customers for
`
`use in the Hughes systems.
`
`19.
`
`For example, Triton Diving Services, LLC (“Triton Diving”), a Louisiana-
`
`based limited liability company with its sales office in Houston, Texas, is a customer of Hughes
`
`and uses Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX broadband satellite system in providing diving services to
`
`oil and gas companies in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. A true and correct copy of a Hughes
`
`publication advertising Triton Diving’s use of its broadband satellite system is attached as
`
`Exhibit H. As described in the publication, Hughes and/or ESSI/BlueTide have worked with
`
`Triton Diving to implement the Hughes broadband satellite system within Triton Diving’s
`
`communications framework, which Hughes describes as the “Hughes Maritime Broadband
`
`solution.” The publication notes that “Triton’s broadband network and applications are fully
`
`managed by Hughes in partnership with ESSI,” and that “ESSI installed Hughes’s marine-
`
`stabilized VSAT antennas on Triton’s fleet.”
`
`20.
`
`For further example, Hercules Offshore, Inc. (“Hercules”), a Delaware
`
`corporation based in Houston that provides drilling and liftboat services to oil and gas companies
`
`in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere, is and/or was a customer of Hughes and a user of
`
`Hughes’s HX IPoS-compliant broadband satellite system. A true and correct copy of a Hughes
`
`publication advertising Hercules’s use of its broadband satellite system is attached as Exhibit I.
`
`6
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 6
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 7 of 18 PageID #: 7
`
`As described in the publication, Hughes and/or ESSI/BlueTide have worked with Hercules to
`
`implement the Hughes broadband satellite system within Hercules’s communications framework,
`
`which Hughes describes as the “Hughes Maritime Broadband solution.” The publication notes
`
`that Hughes and ESSI “are equipping the entire Hercules Offshore fleet of Class 120 to Class
`
`230 liftboats in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico . . . with Hughes satellite-based broadband maritime
`
`services,” and that the “broadband satellite services for Hercules Offshore are fully managed by
`
`Hughes in partnership with ESSI.”
`
`21.
`
`For further example, Bee Mar LLC (“Bee Mar”), a Louisiana-based
`
`maritime transportation limited liability company with its sales office in Sugar Land, TX, is a
`
`customer of Hughes and a user of Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX broadband satellite system. A
`
`true and correct copy of a Hughes publication advertising Bee Mar’s use of its broadband
`
`satellite system is attached as Exhibit J. As described in the publication, Hughes and/or
`
`ESSI/BlueTide have worked with Bee Mar to implement the Hughes broadband satellite system
`
`within Bee Mar’s communications framework, which Hughes describes as the “Hughes Maritime
`
`Broadband solution.” The publication notes that Hughes “is equipping Bee Mar’s entire fleet of
`
`platform supply vessels,” including those that serve “the Gulf of Mexico,” “with its fully
`
`managed maritime solution in partnership with ESSI.”
`
`22.
`
`On information and belief, Hughes provides each of Black Elk, Helm,
`
`Triton Diving, Hercules, and Bee Mar access to Hughes’s IPoS-compliant HX/HN broadband
`
`satellite systems, and Hughes and/or BlueTide fully manage and support the customers’ shared
`
`use of these systems.
`
`COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,240,073
`
`23.
`
`On May 29, 2001, United States Patent No. 6,240,073 (“the ’073 patent”),
`
`which is entitled “Reverse Link for a Satellite Communication Network,” was legally issued by
`
`7
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 7
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 8 of 18 PageID #: 8
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ’073 patent is
`
`attached as Exhibit K.
`
`24.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the ’073 patent is presumed valid.
`
`25. When
`
`issued,
`
`the ’073 patent was assigned
`
`to Shiron Satellite
`
`Communications (1996) Ltd. (“Shiron”), and Shiron was the sole owner of the ’073 patent. In
`
`February 2009, Shiron became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems Ltd., and now
`
`operates as part of Elbit Systems Ltd. By assignment, Elbit is the sole owner of the ’073 patent.
`
`Elbit and Elbit Systems of America jointly retain the exclusive right to enforce the ’073 patent.
`
`26.
`
`Hughes manufactures and sells broadband satellite systems that comply
`
`with the IPoS standard, including but not limited to the HX/HN broadband satellite systems.
`
`Hughes has infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the ’073 patent. The
`
`infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or
`
`offer for sale in or within the United States of products practicing the IPoS standard. By
`
`manufacturing, using, selling, importing, and/or offering to sell these products and their
`
`components, Hughes has in the past and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the
`
`’073 patent, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), either literally or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents.
`
`27.
`
`Defendant BlueTide partners with Hughes to implement the infringing
`
`IPoS-compliant HX/HN broadband satellite systems for maritime customers, and to support
`
`those customers in using the infringing systems. BlueTide is a recent spinoff of ESSI, which
`
`previously performed these functions. BlueTide has infringed and continues to infringe one or
`
`more claims of the ’073 patent, both while acting as the Communications Division of ESSI and
`
`since its spin off into an independent company. The infringing acts include, but are not limited
`
`8
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 8
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 9 of 18 PageID #: 9
`
`to, the use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale in or within the United States of products
`
`practicing the IPoS standard. By using, selling, importing, and/or offering to sell these products
`
`and their components, BlueTide has in the past and continues to infringe one or more of the
`
`claims of the ’073 patent, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), either literally or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant Black Elk is a maritime customer of Hughes and/or BlueTide
`
`and a user of the Hughes IPoS-compliant HX infringing broadband satellite system, which
`
`Hughes, in the maritime context, refers to as the “Hughes Maritime Broadband solution.”
`
`Hughes and/or ESSI/BlueTide have worked with Black Elk to implement the Hughes HX system
`
`within Black Elk’s communications framework, with Hughes and/or BlueTide fully managing
`
`and supporting the system on an ongoing basis. Black Elk has infringed and continues to
`
`infringe one or more claims of the ’073 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited
`
`to, the use in the United States of products practicing the IPoS standard. By using these products
`
`and their components, Black Elk has in the past and continues to infringe one or more of the
`
`claims of the ’073 patent, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), either literally or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents.
`
`29.
`
`Upon information and belief, Hughes and ESSI/BlueTide have sold or
`
`offered to sell Black Elk components of, and access to, the Hughes IPoS-compliant HX
`
`infringing broadband satellite system for use on Black Elk oil platforms and wells located in
`
`Texas waters, and Black Elk has used the infringing system on these installations. Based on
`
`these activities, Hughes, BlueTide, and Black Elk have each committed the tort of patent
`
`infringement in Texas, and this action arises at least in part from such infringement.
`
`9
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 9
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 10 of 18 PageID #: 10
`
`30.
`
`Upon information and belief, Hughes and ESSI/BlueTide have sold or
`
`offered to sell Black Elk components of, and access to, the Hughes IPoS-compliant HX
`
`infringing broadband satellite system for use on Black Elk oil platforms and wells located in
`
`federal waters in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico adjacent to this District, and Black Elk has used the
`
`infringing system on these installations. Upon information and belief, the Black Elk platforms
`
`and wells located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico adjacent to this District are installations
`
`permanently or temporarily attached to the seabed for purposes of exploring for, developing, or
`
`producing resources, and the laws of the United States, including the Patent Act, are extended to
`
`these platforms and wells pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (“OCSLA”), 43
`
`U.S.C. § 1333(a). Based on these activities, Hughes, BlueTide, and Black Elk have each
`
`committed the tort of patent infringement in this District, and this action arises at least in part
`
`from such infringement.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant Helm is a customer of Hughes and a user of the Hughes IPoS-
`
`compliant HX/HN infringing broadband satellite systems. Hughes has worked with Helm to
`
`implement the infringing Hughes satellite systems at least in the Hughes Digital Concierge in
`
`Helm’s Best Western Premier property in Denton, Texas, with Hughes fully managing and
`
`supporting the systems on an ongoing basis. Helm has infringed and continues to infringe one or
`
`more claims of the ’073 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the use in the
`
`United States of products practicing the IPoS standard. By using these products and their
`
`components, Helm has in the past and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the ’073
`
`patent, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`32.
`
`Upon information and belief, Hughes has sold or offered to sell Helm
`
`components of, and access to, the Hughes IPoS-compliant HX/HN infringing broadband satellite
`
`10
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 10
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 11 of 18 PageID #: 11
`
`systems for use by Helm in this District, and Helm has used the infringing systems in this
`
`District. Based on these activities, Hughes and Helm have each committed the tort of patent
`
`infringement in this District, and this action arises at least in part from such infringement.
`
`33.
`
`Defendants have thus each infringed one or more claims of the ’073 patent
`
`by making, using, selling, importing, and/or offering for sale the same infringing Hughes IPoS-
`
`compliant HX/HN broadband satellite systems, including within this District. Moreover, Hughes
`
`and/or BlueTide fully implement, manage, and support the infringing HX/HN broadband satellite
`
`systems for shared use by Black Elk and Helm.
`
`34.
`
`Hughes’s customers, including at least Defendants BlueTide, Black Elk,
`
`and Helm, and non-parties Triton Diving, Hercules, and Bee Mar, have been and are now
`
`infringing, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), one or more claims of the ‘073 patent by using,
`
`selling, offering to sell, and/or importing in or within the United States Hughes HX/HN
`
`broadband satellite systems practicing the IPoS standard.
`
`35.
`
`Hughes has, since at least October 2005, known or been willfully blind to
`
`the fact that such acts by its customers of using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing Hughes
`
`HX/HN broadband satellite systems directly infringe the ’073 patent.
`
`36.
`
`For example, during the prosecution of Hughes’s U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,085,247, entitled “Scheduling and queue servicing in a satellite terminal for bandwidth
`
`allocations in a broadband satellite communications system,” issued August 1, 2006, the patent
`
`examiner at the United States Patent and Trademark Office cited the ’073 patent as relevant prior
`
`art to Hughes.
`
`37. Moreover, during the prosecution of Hughes’s U.S. Patent No. 7,164,661,
`
`entitled “System and Method for Providing a Two-Way Satellite System,” which issued on
`
`11
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 11
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 12 of 18 PageID #: 12
`
`January 16, 2007, the patent examiner not only cited the ’073 patent as relevant prior art to
`
`Hughes, but asserted the ’073 patent as anticipatory prior art that was used to reject the pending
`
`claims of the Hughes patent application. On October 20, 2005, in response to this rejection,
`
`Hughes submitted an Amendment and Remarks that analyzed and described the teachings of the
`
`’073 patent.
`
`38.
`
`Additionally, during the prosecution of Hughes’s U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,468,972, entitled “Method and system for providing efficient data transmission based upon a
`
`contention protocol,” which was issued on December 23, 2008, the patent examiner cited the
`
`’073 patent as relevant prior art to Hughes.
`
`39.
`
`Hughes’s extensive knowledge of the ’073 patent, which covers the
`
`Hughes HX/HN broadband satellite systems, made it known to Hughes that any use, sale, offer
`
`to sell, or importation of the Hughes HX/HN broadband satellite systems would directly infringe
`
`the ’073 patent, or, at the very least, rendered Hughes willfully blind to the fact that any use,
`
`sale, offer to sell, or importation of the Hughes HX/HN broadband satellite systems would
`
`directly infringe the ’073 patent.
`
`40.
`
`Having known or been willfully blind to the fact that its customers’ use,
`
`sale, offer to sell, or importation of the Hughes HX/HN broadband satellite systems would
`
`directly infringe the ’073 patent, Hughes, upon information and belief, actively encouraged and
`
`continues to actively encourage its customers to directly infringe the ’073 patent by using,
`
`selling, offering to sell, or importing Hughes’s HX/HN broadband satellite systems, by, for
`
`example, marketing its infringing systems to customers; working with its customers to
`
`implement and install the infringing systems and components thereof; assisting BlueTide in
`
`implementing and installing the infringing systems and components thereof for customers; fully
`
`12
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 12
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 13 of 18 PageID #: 13
`
`supporting and managing its customers’ continued use of the infringing systems; and providing
`
`technical assistance to customers during their continued use of the infringing systems.
`
`41.
`
`Thus, Hughes has specifically intended to induce, and has induced, its
`
`customers to infringe one or more claims of the ’073 patent, and Hughes has known of or been
`
`willfully blind to such infringement. Hughes has advised, encouraged, and/or aided its
`
`customers to engage in direct infringement, including through its encouragement, advice, and
`
`assistance to customers to use the infringing HX/HN broadband satellite systems.
`
`42.
`
`Based on, among other things, the foregoing facts, Hughes has induced,
`
`and continues to induce, infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) of one or more claims of the
`
`’073 patent.
`
`43.
`
`Further, Hughes sells components to its customers that are especially
`
`made and adapted—and specifically intended by Hughes—to be used as components and
`
`material parts of the system covered by the ’073 patent. For example, Hughes sells HX/HN
`
`series satellite modems to customers, which customers use to access and implement the
`
`infringing HX/HN broadband satellite systems, and without which customers would be unable to
`
`use the infringing HX/HN broadband satellite systems.
`
`44.
`
`Upon information and belief, these components, including the infringing
`
`HX/HN series satellite modems, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce, and,
`
`because they are designed to work only with the HX/HN broadband satellite systems, they do not
`
`have substantial non-infringing uses.
`
`45.
`
`At least since October 2005, based on the forgoing facts, Hughes has
`
`known or been willfully blind to the fact that such components are especially made and adapted
`
`for—and are in fact used in—systems that are covered by the ’073 patent, and that the
`
`13
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 13
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 14 of 18 PageID #: 14
`
`components are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-
`
`infringing uses.
`
`46.
`
`Based on, among other
`
`things,
`
`the forgoing facts, Hughes has
`
`contributorily infringed, and continues to contributorily infringe, one or more claims of the ’073
`
`patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`47.
`
`Defendants’ acts of direct and indirect infringement have caused damage
`
`to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from Defendants the damages sustained as a
`
`result of Defendants’ wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. The infringement of
`
`Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights under the ’073 patent has damaged and will continue to damage
`
`Plaintiffs, causing irreparable harm, for which there is no adequate remedy at law, with the
`
`balance of hardships between Plaintiffs and Defendants, and the public interest, warranting an
`
`injunction.
`
`48.
`
`Upon information and belief, Hughes’s familiarity with the ’073 patent,
`
`which clearly covers at least Hughes’s HX/HN broadband satellite systems, gave Hughes
`
`knowledge, or should have given Hughes knowledge, that there was an objectively high
`
`likelihood that Hughes’s manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of its
`
`broadband satellite systems constitutes infringement of the ’073 patent, and Hughes nonetheless
`
`manufactured, used, sold, imported, and/or offered for sale its broadband satellite systems
`
`notwithstanding that there was an objectively high likelihood that these actions constituted
`
`infringement of the ’073 patent.
`
`49.
`
`Upon information and belief, the infringement of the ’073 patent by
`
`Hughes is willful and deliberate, and with full knowledge of the patent, entitling Plaintiffs to
`
`14
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 14
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 15 of 18 PageID #: 15
`
`increased damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 and to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`COUNT II: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,245,874
`
`50.
`
`On July 17, 2007, United States Patent No. 7,245,874 (“the ’874 patent”),
`
`which is entitled “Infrastructure for Telephony Network,” was legally issued by the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ’874 patent is attached as Exhibit
`
`L.
`
`51.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the ’874 patent is presumed valid.
`
`52. When
`
`issued,
`
`the ’874 patent was assigned
`
`to Shiron Satellite
`
`Communications (1996) Ltd. (“Shiron”), and Shiron was the sole owner of the ’874 patent. In
`
`February 2009, Shiron became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems Ltd., and now
`
`operates as part of Elbit Systems Ltd. By assignment, Elbit is the sole owner of the ’874 patent.
`
`Elbit and Elbit Systems of America jointly retain the exclusive right to enforce the ’874 patent.
`
`53.
`
`Hughes manufactures and sells broadband satellite systems that provide
`
`cellular backhaul services via connections to E1/T1 interfaces at cellular backhaul base stations,
`
`including, but not limited to, the HX/HN broadband satellite systems. A true and correct copy of
`
`a Hughes white paper explaining how its HX/HN broadband satellite systems provide such
`
`cellular backhaul services is attached as Exhibit M.
`
`54.
`
`Hughes has infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the
`
`’874 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale,
`
`importation, and/or offer for sale in or within the United States of products that provide these
`
`cellular backhaul services. By manufacturing, using, selling, importing, and/or offering to sell
`
`these products and their components, Hughes has in the past and continues to infringe one or
`
`15
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 15
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 16 of 18 PageID #: 16
`
`more of the claims of the ’874 patent, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), either literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`55.
`
`Hughes’s acts of infringement have caused damage to Plaintiffs and
`
`Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from Hughes the damages sustained as a result of Hughes’s
`
`wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. The infringement of Plaintiffs’ exclusive
`
`rights under the ’874 patent has damaged and will continue to damage Plaintiffs, causing
`
`irreparable harm, for which there is no adequate remedy at law, with the balance of hardships
`
`between Plaintiffs and Defendants, and the public interest, warranting an injunction.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`56.
`
`Plaintiffs demand a jury trial on all claims and issues, as provided by Rule
`
`38(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for a judgment in their favor and against
`
`Defendants, and respectfully request the following relief:
`
`A.
`
`A judgment that Defendants have infringed one or more of the claims of
`
`the ’073 patent, both literally and under the doctrine of equivalents;
`
`B.
`
`A judgment that Defendants account for and pay Plaintiffs all damages
`
`caused by the infringement of the ’073 patent, which by federal statute can be no less than a
`
`reasonable royalty;
`
`C.
`
`That Plaintiffs be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the
`
`damages caused by reason of Defendants’ infringement of the ’073 patent;
`
`D.
`
`An order permanently enjoining Defendants and their officers, agents,
`
`employees, and those acting in privity with them, from further infringement of the ’073 Patent;
`
`16
`
`Pet., Exh. 1010, p. 16
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-00037-RWS Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 17 of 18 PageID #: 17
`
`E.
`
`A judgment that Hughes has infringed one or more of the claims of the
`
`’874 patent, both literally and under the doctrine of equivalents;
`
`F.
`
`A judgment that Hughes account for and pay Plaintiffs all damages caused
`
`by the infringement of the ’874 patent, which by federal statute can be no less than a reasonable
`
`royalty;
`
`G.
`
`That Plaintiffs be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the
`
`damages caused by reason of infringement of the ’874 patent by Hughes;
`
`H.
`
`An order permanently enjoining Hughes and its officers, agents,
`
`employees, and those acting in privity with it