`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`TITEFLEX CORP.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`GOODSON HOLDINGS, LLC
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`DALLAS DIVISION
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-cv2153-K
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`''
`
`
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`
`PLAINTIFF GOODSON HOLDINGS, LLC’S
`DISCLOSURE OF ASSERTED CLAIMS AND PRELIMINARY
`INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS
`
`In accordance with Amended Miscellaneous Order No. 62, Paragraphs 3-1 and 3-2,
`
`Plaintiff Goodson Holdings LLC (“Goodson”) serves Defendant Titeflex Corp.
`
`(“Titeflex”) with
`
`the following Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Preliminary
`
`Infringement Contentions and Accompanying Production
`
`I.
`
`DISCLOSURE OF ASSERTED CLAIMS AND INFRINGEMENT
`CONTENTIONS
`
`(a)
`
`Asserted Claims
`
`Based on presently available information, Plaintiff contends that Titeflex directly infringes
`
`claims 1, 2, 3, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 7,821,763.
`
`Based on presently available information, Plaintiff contends that Titeflex inducers
`
`installers to directly infringe claims 1, 2, 3, and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 7,562,448.
`
`These claims are collectively referred to as the “Asserted Claims” and these patents are
`
`collectively referred to as the “Patents-in-Suit.” Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to seek
`
`leave of Court to amend or to supplement this disclosure after discovery from Defendant or as
`
`permitted under the rules.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, page 1
`
`
`
`(b)
`
`Accused Products
`
`Plaintiff accuses Defendant of infringing the Asserted Claims under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)
`
`by virtue of its manufacture, use, offer for sale, sale, and/or importation of FlashShield and its
`
`XR3 fittings. On information and belief, Plaintiff accuses Defendant of infringing the Asserted
`
`Claims under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by virtue of its inducing direct infringement by installers of
`
`FlashShield and its XR3 fittings.
`
`Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to seek leave of Court to amend or supplement
`
`these disclosures after discovery from Defendant or as permitted under the rules.
`
`(c)
`
`Claim Charts
`
`Defendant’s Accused Products practice the Asserted Claims as shown in the claim
`
`charts attached hereto as Exhibits A. Any citations to Defendant’s publicly available
`
`documentation in the attached claim charts are exemplary and not exhaustive, as are the
`
`examples provided of the ways in which the Accused Products satisfy the elements of each of the
`
`Asserted Claims. Moreover,
`
`any and all citations or references to publicly available documentation should be understood
`
`to encompass any and all prior versions that incorporate the same or similar functionality, as
`
`well as any similar or derivative products which Plaintiff has been unable to discover from
`
`publically withheld information to this point. Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to seek
`
`leave of Court to amend or supplement this disclosure after discovery from Defendant or as
`
`permitted under the rules.
`
`(d)
`
`Literal Infringement/Doctrine of Equivalents
`
`At this time, and as noted in the claim chart, Plaintiff contends and reasonably believes
`
`that all limitations of the Asserted Claims are present literally. Plaintiff expressly reserves the
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, page 2
`
`
`
`right to amend or supplement these disclosures after discovery from Defendant or as permitted
`
`under the rules.
`
`(e)
`
`Priority Date for Asserted Claims
`
`Plaintiff contends that the Asserted Claims are each entitled to a priority date no later than
`
`
`
`July 18, 2005, which is the filing date of the U.S. Patent 7,562,448, to which each of the Patents-in-Suit
`
`claim priority. Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to amend or supplement these disclosures as
`
`permitted under the rules.
`
`(f)
`
`Plaintiff’s Embodiment of the Claimed Invention
`
`Plaintiff does not rely on an assertion that is has developed its own apparatus that practices
`
`the claimed inventions of the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`II. DOCUMENT PRODUCTION ACCOMPANYING DISCLOSURE
`
`Pursuant to Paragraph 3-2, Plaintiff is serving contemporaneously, non-privileged,
`
`responsive documents which have been Bates numbered GOODSON0000001 through
`
`0000431. Defendant is reminded of it confidentiality obligations under P.R. 2-2, which governs
`
`the disclosure of produced documents unless and until the Court modifies the “default”
`
`protective order or the parties agree otherwise.
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`invoices, advertisements,
`contracts, purchase orders,
`(e.g.,
`Documents
`marketing materials, offer letters, beta site testing agreements, and third party or
`joint development agreements) sufficient to evidence each discussion with,
`disclosure to, or other manner of providing to a third party, or sale of or offer to
`sell, the claimed invention prior to the date of application for the patent in suit.
`
`Plaintiff is not aware of any documents responsive to this category.
`
`All documents evidencing the conception, reduction to practice, design,
`and development of each claimed invention, which were created on or before the
`date of application for the patent in suit or the priority date identified pursuant to
`Paragraph 3-1(a)(5), whichever is earlier; and
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, page 3
`
`
`
`Produced as GOODSON0000408 through 431. These documents are designated and
`marked Highly Confidential, Attorneys’ Eyes Only.
`
`
`(c)
`
`A copy of the file history for the patents in suit.
`
`
`
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 7,562,448 is produced as GOODSON0000001 through
`258. Patent ‘448 is produced as GOODSON0000388 through 398.
`
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 7,821,763 is produced as GOODSON0000259 through
`387. Patent ‘763 is produced as GOODSON0000399 through 407.
`
`Dated: March 16, 2016.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`_____________________
`Mark D. Strachan
`Texas State Bar No. 19351500
`
` Richard A. Sayles
`
`Texas State Bar No.
`
`SAYLES│WERBNER, P.C.
`
`1201 Elm Street, Suite 4400
` Dallas, Texas 75270
`
`(214) 939-8700 – Telephone
`(214) 939-8787 – Facsimile
`mstrachan@swtriallaw.com
`dsayles@swtrial.com
`
`N. Scott Carpenter
`Texas State Bar No. 00790428
`Carpenter & Schumacher, P.C.
`2701 Dallas Pkwy., Suite. 570
`Plano, TX 75093-8790
`(972) 403-1133 – Telephone
`(972) 403-0311 – Facsimile
`scarpenter@cstriallaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, page 4
`
`
`
`Marquette W Wolf
`Texas State Bar No. 00797685
`Ted B. Lyon
`Texas State Bar No. 12741500
`Ted B Lyon & Associates PC
`Town East Tower
`18601 LBJ Frwy, Suite 525
`Mesquite, TX 75150
`(972) 279-6571 – Telephone
`(972) 279-3021 – Facsimile
`mwolf@tedlyon.com
`tlyon@tedlyon.com
`
`
`
` ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`GOODSON HOLDINGS, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that on the 16th day of March, 2016, I electronically served the foregoing
`
`document to the attorneys of record for Defendant Titeflex Corporation.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________________________
`
`
`
`5
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, page 5
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,821,763
`Device for Preventing Electrically Induced Fires in Gas Tubing
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, (Ex. A) cover slide
`
`
`
`These infringement contentions are representative of the manner in which
`Titeflex’s FlashShield infringes claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,821,763 (the ‘763
`Patent). Plaintiff is accusing all versions of FlashShield which have been or will
`sold, serviced, or supported on after October 26, 2010.
`
`Plaintiff has relied on publicly available information and products, and analysis
`derived therefrom, as it has not yet received any documents from Titeflex.
`Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement or amend the list of accused products
`and these contentions based on documents and other discovery when
`received, as well as future versions of Titeflex’s products.
`
`1
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 1
`
`
`
`1. An electrical shunt for gas tubing comprising:
`(a) connecting means at each end of the gas tubing for coupling the
`tubing to gas lines and appliances, wherein the connecting means are
`made of a conductive material that has a higher conductivity than the
`gas tubing; and
`
`(b) conducting means for providing direct electrical contact between
`said connecting means at either end of the gas tubing, wherein the
`conducting means has a higher conductivity than the gas tubing and
`carries electrical current between the connecting means in the event
`of electrical arcing and ground faults, thereby keeping the current off
`the gas tubing and preventing damage to the tubing.
`
`2
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 2
`
`
`
`Flashshield is an electrical shunt for gas tubing
`
`http://www.globusmedical.com/globus-medical-announces-
`altera-minimally-invasive-articulating-expandable-spacer/
`
`3
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 3
`
`
`
`FlashShield is an electrical shunt for gas tubing
`
`http://www.gastite.com/us/index.html/
`
`4
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 4
`
`
`
`“XR3 fittings are designed with a patent pending feature that contours the
`metal mesh. This creates electrical continuity throughout the system.”
`http://www.gastite.com/us/products/flashshield/fittings
`
`5
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 5
`
`
`
`FlashShield XR3 fittings are the means of connecting ends
`of FlashShield tubing to gas lines and appliances. XR3
`fitting are made of brass. (FlashShield Product Catalog p.
`5) Brass has higher conductivity than the CSST in
`FlashShield.
`
`Plaintiff assets that this claim limitation is literally infringed
`by FlashShield.
`
`6
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 6
`
`
`
`“FLASHSHIELD™ – SAFETY IN LAYERS, WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
`BONDING”
`
`7
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 7
`
`
`
`FlashShield comprises a layer of metal mesh which is connected to XR3
`fittings. The mesh provides a means of continuity between the
`connecting means (XR3 fttings). The mesh has a higher conductivity
`than CSST thereby carrying electrical current in the event of electrical
`arcing and ground faults.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`8
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 8
`
`
`
`2. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, Wherein the gas tubing comprises
`Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`“FlashShield™ Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST) supplies natural
`gas or LP gas to appliances. FlashShield is a reliable, lightning-resistant
`system that can be installed in all modes of construction. Flexibility and no
`additional bonding means quick and easy installations: FlashShield® installs
`30-70% faster than traditional piping methods.”
`
`9
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 9
`
`
`
`2. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, Wherein the gas tubing comprises
`Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`FlashShield comprises Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by FlashShield
`
`10
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 10
`
`
`
`3. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, wherein said connecting are made
`of brass.
`
`XR3-SERIES FITTINGS:
`MATERIAL / SPECIFICATIONS:
`• Fitting adapter, bushings and nut – Brass. (FlashShield Product
`Catalog p. 5)
`
`11
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 11
`
`
`
`3. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, wherein said connecting means are
`made of brass.
`
`XR3 fittings are made of brass.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by FlashShield
`
`12
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 12
`
`
`
`6. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, Wherein said conducting means
`comprises a mesh surrounding the gas tubing.
`
`13
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 13
`
`
`
`6. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, Wherein said
`conducting means comprises a mesh surrounding the gas
`tubing.
`
`14
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 14
`
`
`
`6. The electrical shunt according to claim 1, Wherein said
`conducting means comprises a mesh surrounding the gas
`tubing.
`
`FlashShield comprises a layer of metal mesh which is connected to XR3
`fittings.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by FlashShield
`
`15
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 15
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,562,448
`Method for Preventing Electrically Induced Fires in Gas Tubing
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 16
`
`
`
`These infringement contentions are representative of the manner in which
`Titeflex’s FlashShield infringes claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,562,448 (the ‘448
`Patent). Plaintiff is accusing all versions of FlashShield which have been or will
`sold, serviced, or supported on after July 21, 2009.
`
`Plaintiff has relied on publicly available information and products, and analysis
`derived therefrom, as it has not yet received any documents from Titeflex.
`Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement or amend the list of accused products
`and these contentions based on documents and other discovery when
`received, as well as future versions of Titeflex’s products.
`
`17
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 17
`
`
`
`1. A method of preventing electrically induced fires in gas tubing, the method
`comprising :
`
`(a) affixing connectors to each end of the gas tubing, wherein the
`connectors allow the tubing to be securely coupled to gas lines and
`appliances, allowing the gas tubing to carry gas between a gas line and
`an appliance, and wherein the connectors are made of a conductive
`material; and
`
`(b) coupling conductive wire to said connectors, wherein the conductive
`wire provides direct electrical contact between the connectors;
`
`(c) wherein if an electrical charge goes to ground via the gas tubing, the
`conductive wire carries the electrical current rather than the gas tubing
`itself, preventing damage to the tubing from electrical current.
`
`18
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 18
`
`
`
`“FlashShield is a patent-pending
`metallicallyshielded
`flexible gas piping system designed to
`create a lightning-resistant system.”
`(FlashShield Product Catalog p. 3)
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 19
`
`
`
`http://www.globusmedical.com/globus-medical-announces-
`altera-minimally-invasive-articulating-expandable-spacer/
`
`20
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 20
`
`
`
`“XR3 fittings are designed with a patent pending feature that contours the
`metal mesh. This creates electrical continuity throughout the system.”
`http://www.gastite.com/us/products/flashshield/fittings
`
`21
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 21
`
`
`
`In the FlashShield system, XR3 fittings are connectors which are
`affixed to each end of FlashShield tubing to allow the tubing to be
`securely coupled to gas lines and applicances, thereby allowing the
`gas tubing to carry gas between gas lines and appliances. XR3
`fitting are made of brass. (FlashShield Product Catalog p. 5) Brass
`has higher conductivity than the CSST in FlashShield.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`22
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 22
`
`
`
`http://www.globusmedical.com/globus-medical-announces-
`altera-minimally-invasive-articulating-expandable-spacer/
`
`23
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 23
`
`
`
`http://www.globusmedical.com/globus-medical-announces-
`altera-minimally-invasive-articulating-expandable-spacer/
`
`24
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 24
`
`
`
`“To complete the system, we redesigned our fittings to ensure seamless
`continuity with the shield. XR3 fittings are designed with a patent pending
`feature that contours the metal shield. This creates electrical
`continuity throughout the system.
`
`FEATURES & BENEFITS:
`• Metallically-shielded gas piping system.
`• Metal shield layer dissipates electricity.
`• New fittings provide continuity with metal shield.”
`
`FlashShield Product Catalog p. 3
`
`25
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 25
`
`
`
`In the FlashShield system, the XR3 fittings (connectors) are connected to
`a layer of metal mesh in the FlashShield tubing which provides direct
`electrical contact between the XR3 connectors.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`26
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 26
`
`
`
`(c) wherein if an electrical charge goes to ground via the gas tubing, the
`
`conductive wire carries the electrical current rather than the gas tubing itself,
`
`preventing damage to the tubing from electrical current.
`
`— luminum mesh
`“shield” diss pares
`electricity and heat
`
`‘
`
`.
`‘
`
`‘
`
`Safety in layers without
`additiOI'Ia| bOI'Iding
`
`0 Proven to perform more than 10K better than similar
`conductive CSST
`
`0 Enhanced continuity between fitting and expanded metal
`
`I No additional manufacturer bonding required
`
`Flashshield is easy to install
`
`I No spacing requirements. allowing for simple routing through
`
`|
`
`complex layouts
`
`T""'°.'aye'5 °f_
`sernz-conductive
`" “ ‘ ? polymerjackets
`
`U Pre-marked by the foot for easy measuring and installation
`
`3 Provides the same flexibility as standard CSST
`
`0 Clean and attractive finished installation
`
`27
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 27
`
`
`
`In the FlashShield system, the layer of metal mesh which is connected to
`XR3 connectors provides a means of continuity between the connecting
`means (XR3 fittings). The mesh has a higher conductivity than CSST
`thereby carrying electrical current in the event of electrical arcing and
`ground faults and preventing damage to the CSST from electrical current.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`28
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 28
`
`
`
`2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the gas tubing comprises
`Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`“FlashShield™ Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST) supplies natural
`gas or LP gas to appliances. FlashShield is a reliable, lightning-resistant
`system that can be installed in all modes of construction. Flexibility and no
`additional bonding means quick and easy installations: FlashShield® installs
`30-70% faster than traditional piping methods.”
`
`29
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 29
`
`
`
`2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the gas tubing comprises
`Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`FlashShield comprises a Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST).
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`30
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 30
`
`
`
`3. The method according to claim 1, wherein said connectors are made
`of brass.
`
`31
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 31
`
`
`
`3. The method according to claim 1, wherein said connectors are made of
`brass.
`
`FlashShield XR3 fittings are the connectors of FlashShield tubing
`to gas lines and appliances. XR3 fittings are made of brass.
`(FlashShield Product Catalog p. 5)
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield.
`
`32
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 32
`
`
`
`7. The method according to claim 1, wherein said conductive wire comprises a
`mesh surrounding the gas tubing.
`
`33
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 33
`
`
`
`7. The method according to claim 1, wherein said conductive wire comprises a
`mesh surrounding the gas tubing.
`
`34
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 34
`
`
`
`7. The method according to claim 1, wherein said conductive wire comprises a
`mesh surrounding the gas tubing.
`
`FlashShield comprises a layer of metal mesh surrounding the CSST.
`
`Plaintiff asserts that this claim limitation is literally infringed by
`FlashShield
`
`35
`
`Titeflex - Exhibit 1033, slide 35
`
`
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
