Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 1 of 36 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`SHERMAN DIVISION
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC and
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`
`
`AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 4:24-cv-980
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiffs Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC (collectively,
`
`“Intellectual Ventures,” “IV,” or “Plaintiffs”), in their Complaint for patent infringement against
`
`Defendant American Airlines, Inc. (“American” or “Defendant”), hereby alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a civil action for the infringement of United States Patent No. 8,332,844
`
`(“the ’844 Patent”), United States Patent No. 8,407,722 (“the ’722 Patent”), United States Patent
`
`No. 7,949,785 (“the ‘785 Patent”), United States Patent No. 8,027,326 (“the ’326 Patent”),
`
`United States Patent No. 7,324,469 (“the ’469 Patent”), and United States Patent No. 7,257,582
`
`(“the ’582 Patent”) (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”) under the Patent Laws of the United States,
`
`35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`Intellectual Ventures
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Intellectual Ventures I LLC (“Intellectual Ventures I”) is a Delaware
`
`limited liability company having its principal place of business located at 3150 139th Avenue SE,
`
`Bellevue, Washington 98005.
`
`1
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 1 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 2 of 36 PageID #: 2
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff Intellectual Ventures II LLC (“Intellectual Ventures II”) is a Delaware
`
`limited liability company having its principal place of business located at 3150 139th Avenue SE,
`
`Bellevue, Washington 98005.
`
`4.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the ’722,
`
`’582, ’326, and ’785 Patents.
`
`5.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’844 and ’469 Patents.
`
`American Airlines, Inc.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant American Airlines, Inc. (“American”) is a
`
`Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at One Skyview Drive, Fort Worth, Texas
`
`76155. American is registered to do business in the State of Texas and has been since at least
`
`June 13, 1934. On information and belief, American does business in the State of Texas and the
`
`Eastern District of Texas.
`
`7.
`
`Upon information and belief, American makes, utilizes, services, tests, distributes,
`
`sells, offers, and/or offers for sale in the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas products,
`
`services, and technologies (“Accused Products and Services”) that infringe the Patents-in-Suit,
`
`contributes to the infringement by others, and/or induces others to commit acts of patent
`
`infringement in the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`8.
`
`On information and belief, American has derived substantial revenue from
`
`infringing acts in the Eastern District of Texas, including from the sale and use of the Accused
`
`Products and Services as described in more detail below.
`
`2
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 2 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 3 of 36 PageID #: 3
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`9.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United
`
`States. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`10.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over American because American conducts
`
`business in and has committed acts of patent infringement, contributed to infringement by others,
`
`and/or induced others to commit acts of patent infringement in this District, the State of Texas,
`
`and elsewhere in the United States, and has established minimum contacts with this forum state
`
`such that the exercise of jurisdiction over American would not offend the traditional notions of fair
`
`play and substantial justice. Upon information and belief, American transacts substantial business
`
`with entities and individuals in the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas, by, among
`
`other things, making, utilizing, servicing, testing, distributing, selling, offering, and/or offering for
`
`sale the Accused Products and Services that infringe the Patents-in-Suit, as well as by providing
`
`service and support to its customers in this District. American also places certain of the Accused
`
`Products and Services into the stream of commerce with the knowledge and expectation that they
`
`will be sold in the State of Texas, including this District. For example, American provides Wi-Fi
`
`service for its customers and/or employees on American airplanes within this District.
`
`11.
`
`American is subject to this Court’s general and specific jurisdiction pursuant to due
`
`process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute due at least to American’s substantial business in the
`
`State of Texas and this District, including maintaining its principal place of business at
`
`One Skyview Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76155, through its past infringing activities, because
`
`American regularly does and solicits business herein, and/or because American has engaged in
`
`persistent conduct and/or has derived substantial revenues from goods and services provided to
`
`customers in the State of Texas and this District.
`
`3
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 3 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 4 of 36 PageID #: 4
`
`12.
`
`Upon information and belief, American is a corporation organized and existing
`
`under the laws of Texas with a principal place of business located at One Skyview Drive,
`
`Fort Worth, Texas 76155. On information and belief, American does business itself, or through
`
`its subsidiaries, affiliates, and agents, in the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`13.
`
`Upon information and belief, American flies to 18 destinations1 within Texas in
`
`addition to several local routes through its regional brand, American Eagle Airlines.
`
`14.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b)
`
`because American maintains numerous regular and established places of business in this District,
`
`and has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this District giving rise to this
`
`Action.
`
`15.
`
`Upon information and belief, American Airlines maintains regular and established
`
`places of business via terminals, airplanes, operations centers, ticket counters, as well as other
`
`equipment and facilities at airports located in this district. For example, American serves several
`
`airports in the Eastern District of Texas: (1) Tyler Pounds Regional Airport (TYR) – located at
`
`700 Skyway Blvd, Tyler, TX 75704; (2) East Texas Regional Airport (GGG) – located at
`
`269 Terminal Cir, Longview, TX 75603; (3) Texarkana Regional Airport (TXK) – located at
`
`2600 Txk Blvd, Texarkana, AR 71854; (4) Easterwood Airport (CLL) – located at 1 McKenzie
`
`Terminal Blvd, College Station, TX 77845; and (5) Jack Brooks Regional Airport (BPT) – located
`
`at US-69, Beaumont, TX 77705 (collectively “American Airport Locations”).
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, American holds these American Airport Locations to
`
`be regular and established places of business of American in this District by operating flights,
`
`selling tickets, and servicing customers at these locations.
`
`
`1 https://www.aa.com/en-us/flights-to-texas (Last Accessed on 10/9/2024).
`
`4
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 4 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 5 of 36 PageID #: 5
`
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, the American Airport Locations in this District are
`
`regular, continuous, and established physical places of business of American, being established,
`
`ratified, and/or controlled by American as authorized locations, which are places of business at
`
`which American makes, utilizes, services, tests, distributes, offers and/or offers for sale the
`
`Accused Products and Services.
`
`18.
`
`Upon information and belief, American ratifies and holds these American Airport
`
`Locations out as regular and established places of business of American in this District by listing
`
`them on American’s website, including, e.g., as shown below.2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2 https://www.aa.com/en-us/fare-finder-map. (Last Accessed on 10/9/2024).
`
`5
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 5 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 6 of 36 PageID #: 6
`
`19.
`
`Upon information and belief, American has established, ratified, and holds these
`
`American Locations out as regular and established places of business of American by directing
`
`and controlling these American Location’s actions and services in the foregoing manner, and has
`
`consented to these American Locations acting on American’s behalf and being American’s places
`
`of business whereby the Accused Products and Services and utilized, serviced, tested, distributed,
`
`offered, and/or offered for sale and placed into the stream of commerce in this District, and these
`
`American Locations have consented to act on American’s behalf pursuant to the foregoing terms
`
`of control and direction in order to, among other things, be able to offer flight services that utilize
`
`the Accused Products and Services.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`20.
`
`Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC (“Intellectual Ventures Management”)
`
`was founded in 2000. Since then, Intellectual Ventures Management has been involved in the
`
`business of inventing. Intellectual Ventures Management facilitates invention by inventors and
`
`the filing of patent applications for those inventions, collaboration with others to develop and
`
`patent inventions, and the acquisition and licensing of patents from individual inventors,
`
`universities, corporations, and other institutions. A significant aspect of Intellectual Ventures
`
`Management’s business is managing the Plaintiffs in this case, Intellectual Ventures I and
`
`Intellectual Ventures II.
`
`21.
`
`One of the founders of Intellectual Ventures Management is Nathan Myhrvold, who
`
`worked at Microsoft from 1986 until 2000 in a variety of executive positions, culminating in his
`
`appointment as the company’s first Chief Technology Officer (“CTO”) in 1996. While at
`
`Microsoft, Dr. Myhrvold founded Microsoft Research in 1991 and was one of the world’s foremost
`
`6
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 6 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 7 of 36 PageID #: 7
`
`software experts. Between 1986 and 2000, Microsoft became the world’s largest technology
`
`company.
`
`22.
`
`Under Dr. Myhrvold’s leadership, Intellectual Ventures acquired more than 70,000
`
`patents covering many important inventions used in the airline and avionics industries.
`
`23.
`
`American offers various types of airline and avionics related services and
`
`technologies to its customers, partners, vendors, customers, and/or third parties. American’s
`
`products and services utilize and/or support various technologies, including but not limited to
`
`Kubernetes, Kafka, Docker, Spark, Hadoop, In-Flight Connectivity, and Internet Hotspots.
`
`Certain of these products and services, such as In-Flight Connectivity and Internet Hotspots, are
`
`offered to American’s customers and use WiFi technologies, managed by American, to enable
`
`American products and services that it further offers to its customers. Certain of these products
`
`and services, such as Kubernetes, Kafka, Docker, Spark, and Hadoop, are technologies used and
`
`managed by American to enable the various products and services that American offers to its
`
`customers. American makes, utilizes, services, tests, distributes, offers, and/or offers for sale these
`
`products and services throughout the world, including in the United States and Texas.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,332,844
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`24.
`
`On December 11, 2012, the PTO issued the ’844 Patent, titled “Root Image
`
`Caching and Indexing for Block-Level Distributed Application Management.” The ’844 Patent is
`
`valid and enforceable. A copy of the ’844 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
`
`25.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’844 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’844 Patent.
`
`7
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 7 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 8 of 36 PageID #: 8
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,407,722
`
`26.
`
`On March 26, 2013, the PTO issued the ’722 Patent, titled “Asynchronous
`
`Messaging Using a Node Specialization Architecture in the Dynamic Routing Network.” The
`
`’722 Patent is valid and enforceable. A copy of the ’722 Patent is attached as Exhibit 2.
`
`27.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’722 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’722 Patent.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,949,785
`
`28.
`
`On May 24, 2011, the PTO issued the ’785 Patent, titled “Secure Virtual
`
`Community Network System.” The ’785 Patent is valid and enforceable. A copy of the
`
`’785 Patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`
`29.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’785 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’785 Patent.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,027,326
`
`30.
`
`On September 27, 2011, the PTO issued the ’326 Patent, titled “Method and System
`
`for High Data Rate Multi-Channel WLAN Architecture.” The ’326 Patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`A copy of the ’326 Patent is attached as Exhibit 4.
`
`31.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’326 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’326 Patent.
`
`8
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 8 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 9 of 36 PageID #: 9
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,324,469
`
`32.
`
`On January 29, 2008, the PTO issued the ’469 Patent, titled “Satellite Distributed
`
`High Speed Internet Access.” The ’469 Patent is valid and enforceable. A copy of the ’469 Patent
`
`is attached as Exhibit 5.
`
`33.
`
`Intellectual Ventures II is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’469 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’469 Patent.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,257,582
`
`34.
`
`On August 14, 2007, the PTO issued the ’582 Patent, titled “Load Balancing with
`
`Shared Data.” The ’582 Patent is valid and enforceable. A copy of the ’582 Patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit 6.
`
`35.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’582 Patent, and holds all substantial rights therein, including the right to grant licenses, to
`
`exclude others, and to enforce and recover past damages for infringement of the ’582 Patent.
`
`COUNT I
`
`(American’s Infringement of U.S. Patent No. U.S. Patent No. 8,332,844)
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 35 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Direct Infringement. American, without authorization or license from IV, has
`
`directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents,
`
`individually and/or jointly, the ’844 Patent, by making, utilizing, servicing, testing, distributing,
`
`selling, offering, and/or offering for sale the Accused Products and Services that infringe the
`
`’844 Patent, including but not limited to at least the Accused Products and Services identified in
`
`the example chart incorporated, per paragraph 48 below, into this Count (collectively, “Example
`
`9
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 9 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 10 of 36 PageID #: 10
`
`American Count I Products and Services”) that infringe at least the example claims of the
`
`’844 Patent identified in the chart incorporated into this Count (the “Example ’844 Patent Claims”)
`
`literally or by the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`38.
`
`On information and belief, American has also infringed and continues to directly
`
`infringe literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the Example ’844 Patent Claims, by internal
`
`testing and use of the Example American Count I Products and Services.
`
`39.
`
`Each claim of the ’844 Patent is valid, enforceable, and patent eligible under
`
`Section 101 of the Patent Act. For example, the ’844 Patent is related to root image caching and
`
`indexing for block-level distributed application management. The ’844 Patent discloses and claim
`
`systems and methods that address technical problems that are inherent in and derive from prior art
`
`method and systems involving the problems of updating the boot image(s) for the cluster, among
`
`other issues. The ’844 Patent addressed this technical problem and others with a technical solution.
`
`Additionally, the claims of the ’844 Patent are novel and non-obvious and recite elements and
`
`steps that were not routine or conventional at the time of the invention, either individually or in
`
`combination.
`
`40.
`
`Each claim of the ’844 Patent recites an independent invention. Neither the
`
`example claims described nor any other individual claim is representative of all claims in the
`
`’844 Patent.
`
`41.
`
`American has known that its infringing products and services, such as the Example
`
`Count I Products and Services, cannot be used without infringing the technology claimed in the
`
`’844 Patent, and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses.
`
`42. Willful Blindness. American knew of the ’844 Patent, or should have known of
`
`the ’844 Patent, but was willfully blind to its existence. American has had actual knowledge of
`
`10
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 10 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 11 of 36 PageID #: 11
`
`the ’844 Patent not later than receipt of a letter, dated September 30, 2024, and received on the
`
`same date. By the time of trial, American will have known (since receiving such notice) that its
`
`continued actions would infringe and actively induce and contribute to the infringement of one or
`
`more claims of the ’844 Patent. See Exhibit 7 (Notice Letter).
`
`43.
`
`Induced Infringement. American has also contributed to and/or induced, and
`
`continues to contribute to and/or induce the infringement of the ’844 Patent by contributing to
`
`and/or inducing its partners, vendors, customers, and/or third parties to use or cause to use its
`
`products and services, such as Example American Count I Products and Services, in an infringing
`
`manner as described above, including encouraging and instructing its partners, vendors, customers,
`
`and/or third parties to infringe the ’844 Patent. For example, on information and belief, American
`
`offers products and services to its customers and third parties and/or employees that are associated
`
`with backend functionality provided by the Example American Count I Products and Services.
`
`American has contributed to and/or induced, and continues to contribute to and/or induce the
`
`infringement of the ’844 Patent by offering such products and services and contributing to and/or
`
`inducing its customers and third parties and/or employees to use such products and services that
`
`are associated with backend functionality provided by the Example American Count I Products
`
`and Services.
`
`44.
`
`American therefore actively, knowingly, and intentionally has committed, and
`
`continues to commit, affirmative acts that cause infringement, literally and/or by the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, of one or more claims of the ’844 Patent with knowledge of the ’844 Patent and
`
`knowledge that the induced acts constitute infringement of one or more claims of the ’844 Patent.
`
`American has actively induced others, including, but not limited to, partners, vendors, customers,
`
`and/or third- parties who use the Example American Count I Products and Services to infringe the
`
`11
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 11 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 12 of 36 PageID #: 12
`
`’844 Patent, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents, throughout the United States, including
`
`within this District, by, among other things, advertising, promoting, and instructing the infringing
`
`use of the Example American Count I Products and Services.
`
`45.
`
`Contributory Infringement. American actively, knowingly, and intentionally has
`
`committed, and continues to commit contributory infringement, literally and/or by the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by, inter alia, knowingly providing software and technologies that when used, cause
`
`the direct infringement of one or more claims of the ’844 Patent by its partners, vendors, customers,
`
`and/or third parties, and which have no substantial non-infringing uses, or include a separate and
`
`distinct technology that is especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the
`
`’844 Patent, and is not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-
`
`infringing use.
`
`46.
`
`American therefore actively, knowingly, and intentionally has been and continues
`
`to materially contribute to their partners’, vendors’, and/or third-parties’ infringement of the
`
`’844 Patent, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents, by making, utilizing, servicing, testing,
`
`distributing, selling, offering, and/or offering for sale the Example American Count I Products and
`
`Services for use in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the ’844 Patent. Example
`
`American Count I Products and Services are especially made or adapted for infringing the
`
`’844 Patent and have no substantial non-infringing use.
`
`47.
`
`Exhibit 8 (claim chart) includes the Example American Count I Products and
`
`Services and Example ’844 Patent Claims. As set forth in the chart, the Example American Count
`
`I Products and Services practice the technology claimed by the ’844 Patent. Accordingly, the
`
`Example American Count I Products and Services incorporated in the chart satisfies all elements
`
`of the Example ’844 Patent Claims.
`
`12
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 12 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 13 of 36 PageID #: 13
`
`48.
`
`IV therefore incorporates by reference in its allegations herein the claim chart of
`
`Exhibit 8.
`
`49.
`
`Intellectual Ventures is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’844 Patent and will continue to be damaged by such
`
`infringement. Intellectual Ventures is entitled to recover damages from Defendant to compensate
`
`them for Defendant’s infringement, as alleged above, in an amount measured by no less than a
`
`reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. § 284, as well as enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 284.
`
`50.
`
`Further, Defendant’s infringement of Intellectual Ventures’ rights under the
`
`’844 Patent will continue to damage Intellectual Ventures’ business, causing irreparable harm for
`
`which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by the Court.
`
`51.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s acts of infringement, Plaintiffs have suffered and will
`
`continue to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(American’s Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,407,722)
`
`52.
`
`53.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 51 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Direct Infringement. American, without authorization or license from IV, has
`
`directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents,
`
`individually and/or jointly, the ’722 Patent, by making, utilizing, servicing, testing, distributing,
`
`selling, offering, and/or offering for sale the Accused Products and Services that infringe the
`
`’722 Patent, including but not limited to at least the Accused Products and Services identified in
`
`the example chart incorporated, per paragraph 64 below, into this Count (collectively, “Example
`
`American Count II Products and Services”) that infringed at least the example claims of the
`
`13
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 13 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 14 of 36 PageID #: 14
`
`’722 Patent identified in the chart incorporated into this Count (the “Example ’722 Patent Claims”)
`
`literally or by the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`54.
`
`On information and belief, American has also infringed and continues to directly
`
`infringe, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the Example ’722 Patent Claims, by internal
`
`testing and use of the Example American Count II Products and Services.
`
`55.
`
`Each claim of the ’722 Patent is valid, enforceable, and patent eligible under
`
`Section 101 of the Patent Act. For example, the ’722 Patent is related to a dynamic content routing
`
`network that routes update messages including updates to properties of live objects to clients. The
`
`’722 Patent discloses and claims systems and methods that address technical problems that are
`
`inherent in and derive from prior art method and systems involving the problems of dynamically
`
`updating content at a client device, among other issues. The ’722 Patent addressed this technical
`
`problem and others with a technical solution that is described in the specification and captured by
`
`one or more claims. Additionally, the claims of the ’722 Patent are novel and non-obvious and
`
`recite elements and steps that were not routine or conventional at the time of the invention, either
`
`individually or in combination.
`
`56.
`
`Each claim of the ’722 Patent recites an independent invention. Neither the
`
`example claims described nor any other individual claim is representative of all claims in the
`
`’722 Patent.
`
`57.
`
`American has known that its infringing products and services, such as the Example
`
`American Count II Products and Services, cannot be used without infringing the technology
`
`claimed in the ’722 Patent, and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-
`
`infringing uses.
`
`14
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 14 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 15 of 36 PageID #: 15
`
`58. Willful Blindness. American knew of the ’722 Patent, or should have known of
`
`the ’722 Patent, but was willfully blind to its existence. American has had actual knowledge of
`
`the ’722 Patent not later than receipt of a letter, dated September 30, 2024 and received on the
`
`same date. By the time of trial, American will have known and intended (since receiving such
`
`notice) that its continued actions would infringe and actively induce and contribute to the
`
`infringement of one or more claims of the ’722 Patent. See Exhibit 7 (Notice Letter).
`
`59.
`
`Induced Infringement. American has also contributed to and/or induced, and
`
`continues to contribute to and/or induce the infringement of the ’722 Patent by contributing to
`
`and/or inducing its partners, vendors, customers, and/or third parties to use its products and
`
`services, such as Example American Count II Products and Services, in an infringing manner as
`
`described above, including encouraging and instructing its partners, vendors, customers, and/or
`
`third parties to infringe the ’722 Patent. For example, on information and belief, American offers
`
`products and services to its customers and third parties and/or employees that are associated with
`
`backend functionality provided by the Example American Count II Products and Services.
`
`American has contributed to and/or induced, and continues to contribute to and/or induce the
`
`infringement of the ’722 Patent by offering such products and services and contributing to and/or
`
`inducing its customers and third parties and/or employees to use such products and services that
`
`are associated with backend functionality provided by the Example American Count II Products
`
`and Services.
`
`60.
`
`American therefore actively, knowingly, and intentionally has committed, and
`
`continues to commit, affirmative acts that cause infringement, literally and/or by the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, of one or more claims of the ’722 Patent with knowledge of the ’722 Patent and
`
`knowledge that the induced acts constitute infringement of one or more claims of the ’722 Patent
`
`15
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 15 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 16 of 36 PageID #: 16
`
`American has actively induced others, including, but not limited to, partners, vendors, customers,
`
`and/or third parties who use the Example American Count II Products and Services to infringe the
`
`’722 Patent, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents, throughout the United States, including
`
`within this District, by, among other things, advertising, promoting, and instructing the infringing
`
`use of the Example American Count II Products and Services.
`
`61.
`
`Contributory Infringement. American actively, knowingly, and intentionally has
`
`committed, and continues to commit contributory infringement, literally and/or by the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by, inter alia, knowingly providing software and technologies that when used, cause
`
`the direct infringement of one or more claims of the ’722 Patent by its partners, vendors, customers,
`
`and/or third parties, and which have no substantial non-infringing uses, or include a separate and
`
`distinct technology that is especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the
`
`’722 Patent, and is not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-
`
`infringing use.
`
`62.
`
`American therefore actively, knowingly, and intentionally has been and continues
`
`to materially contribute to their partners’, vendors’, and/or third-parties’ infringement of the
`
`’722 Patent, literally and/or by the doctrine of equivalents, by making, utilizing, servicing, testing,
`
`distributing, selling, offering, and/or offering for sale Example American Count II Products and
`
`Services for use in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the ’722 Patent.
`
`Example American Count II Products and Services are especially made or adapted for infringing
`
`the ’722 Patent and have no substantial non-infringing use.
`
`63.
`
`Exhibit 9 (claim chart) includes the Example American Count II Products and
`
`Services and Example ’722 Patent Claims. As set forth in the chart, the Example American Count
`
`II Products and Services practice the technology claimed by the ’722 Patent. Accordingly, the
`
`16
`
`PETITIONERS - AMERICAN/SOUTHWEST, Exhibit 1023
`Page 16 of 36
`
`

`

`Case 4:24-cv-00980-ALM Document 1 Filed 11/02/24 Page 17 of 36 PageID #: 17
`
`Example American Count II Products and Services incorporated in the chart satisfies all elements
`
`of the Example ’722 Patent Claims.
`
`64.
`
`Intellectual Ventures therefore incorporates by reference in its allegations herein
`
`the claim chart of Exhibit 9.
`
`65.
`
`Intellectual Ventures is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’722 Patent and will continue to be damaged by such
`
`infringement. Intellectual Ventures is entitled to recover damages from Defendant to compensate
`
`them for Defendant’s infringement, as alleged above, in an amount measured by no less than a
`
`reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. § 284, as well as enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 284.
`
`66.
`
`Further, Defendant’s infringement of Intellectual Ventures’ rights under the
`
`’722 Patent will continue to damage I