Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 1 of 35 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`IPCOM, GMBH & CO. KG
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Civil Case No.: 2:20-cv-321
`
`v.
`
`SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P., SPRINTCOM, INC.,
`SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS INC., SPRINT
`COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., and
`SPRINT CORPORATION, DEUTSCHE
`TELEKOM AG
`
`Defendants.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff IPCom Gmbh & Co. KG hereby files this Complaint against Sprint Spectrum,
`
`L.P. (d/b/a Sprint PCS), SprintCom, Inc., Sprint Communications Inc., Sprint Communications
`
`Company, L.P., Sprint Corporation, and Deutsche Telekom AG (collectively, “Sprint” or
`
`“Defendants”), and alleges as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`IPCom Gmbh & Co. KG (“IPCom”) is a limited partnership organized under the
`
`laws of Germany with its principal place of business at Zugspitzstraße 15, 82049 Pullach,
`
`Germany.
`
`2.
`
`Deutsche Telekom AG (“Deutsche Telekom”) is an Aktiengesellschaft organized
`
`and existing under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany with its principal place of
`
`business in Bonn, Germany.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 2 of 35 PageID #: 2
`
`3.
`
`Sprint Spectrum L.P. d/b/a Sprint PCS (“Sprint PCS”) is a Delaware limited
`
`partnership with its principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park, Kansas
`
`66251 and is an indirect, controlled subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom.
`
`4.
`
`SprintCom, Inc. (“SprintCom”) is a Kansas corporation with its principal place of
`
`business at 6391 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park, Kansas 66251 and is an indirect, controlled
`
`subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom.
`
`5.
`
`Sprint Communications Inc. (“Sprint Communications Corporation”), is a Kansas
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 6160 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park, Kansas
`
`66251 and is an indirect, controlled subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom.
`
`6.
`
`Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (“Sprint Communications”) is a Delaware
`
`limited partnership with its principal place of business at 6391 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park,
`
`Kansas 66251 and is an indirect, controlled subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom.
`
`7.
`
`Sprint Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business
`
`at 6200 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park, Kansas 66251 and is an indirect, controlled subsidiary of
`
`Deutsche Telekom.
`
`8.
`
`The Defendants operate one or more wireless telecommunications networks to
`
`provide wireless telecommunications services in the United States under brand names including
`
`but not limited to “Sprint.” These telecommunications networks have also been used to provide
`
`wireless telecommunications services for the Virgin Mobile USA and Boost Mobile brands.
`
`NATURE OF ACTION
`
`9.
`
`This is a civil action for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,333,822 (the “’822
`
`Patent”), 10,382,909 (the “’909 Patent”); 6,813,261 (the “’261 Patent); 7,006,463 (the “’463
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 3 of 35 PageID #: 3
`
`Patent”); and 6,983,147 (the “’147 Patent”) (collectively the “Patents-in-Suit”), arising under the
`
`patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`10.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 1331 and 1338(a) because it arises under the patent laws of the United States.
`
`11.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants, which have committed
`
`acts of infringement in Texas and this judicial district, or are vicariously liable for the actions of
`
`each other in this judicial district in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. For instance, Defendants have
`
`performed infringing methods, and made and used infringing systems that provide wireless
`
`telecommunications services. The Defendants have derived and continue to derive substantial
`
`revenue from the sale and use of infringing products and services in this district. In addition,
`
`Sprint Spectrum L.P., Sprint Communications Inc., SprintCom Inc., Sprint Communications
`
`Company L.P., and Sprint Corporation are registered to do business in Texas, and the Defendants
`
`own and/or maintain numerous stores and office locations within Texas. In view of the
`
`foregoing, this court possesses both general and specific jurisdiction over the Defendants.
`
`12.
`
`Deutsche Telekom AG is subject to this court’s personal jurisdiction. Deutsche
`
`Telekom AG owns a controlling interest in the remaining defendants, which are indirectly owned
`
`and controlled subsidiaries. Deutsche Telekom is not a passive owner of these entities, but
`
`instead controls and directs these subsidiaries and has acted in concert with them to provide
`
`infringing telecommunications services in Texas and in this judicial district. In view of the
`
`foregoing, and as a joint tortfeasor, Deutsche Telekom AG is subject to personal jurisdiction in
`
`this district along with its subsidiaries.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 4 of 35 PageID #: 4
`
`13.
`
`Alternatively, the court may exercise personal jurisdiction over Deutsche
`
`Telekom pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2), which provides that “for a claim that arises under
`
`federal law, serving a summons or filing a waiver of service establishes personal jurisdiction
`
`over a defendant if: (a) the defendant is not subject to jurisdiction in any state’s courts of general
`
`jurisdiction; and (b) exercising jurisdiction is consistent with the United States Constitution and
`
`laws.”
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`jurisdiction.
`
`IPCom’s claim for patent infringement arises under federal law.
`
`Deutsche Telekom is not subject to jurisdiction in any state’s courts of general
`
`16.
`
`Exercising jurisdiction over Deutsche Telekom in this district would not run afoul
`
`of the Constitution, due process, or any laws. Deutsche Telekom facilitated the merger of the T-
`
`Mobile and Sprint group companies and obtained a controlling interest in Sprint for the purpose
`
`of competing in the United States against rival wireless companies. Deutsche Telekom CEO
`
`Timotheus Höttges stated during an earnings call on or about February 19, 2020 that “getting the
`
`deal done puts the company on an equal footing and in a position to ramp up its attacks on the
`
`competition in the U.S.” He further commented that “[w]e see a light at the end of the tunnel …
`
`Our attempt is going to be the No. 1 in the U.S . . . .”1 Indeed, Höttges testified on behalf of the
`
`merger during the antitrust trial challenging the merger in the Southern District of New York.
`
`Deutsche Telekom derives and will derive monetary benefit from Sprint’s infringing network
`
`operations in Texas and upon information and belief, continues to exert control over the
`
`operations of the company.
`
`1 https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/dt-ceo-sees-light-at-end-tunnel-t-mobile-sprint-
`combo.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 5 of 35 PageID #: 5
`
`17.
`
`Deutsche Telekom is aware of IPCom and the Patents-in-Suit and indeed took a
`
`license to the patents in June, 2013, which did not extend to the acquired Sprint companies.
`
`IPCom notified Deutsche Telekom of the applicability to the Patents-in-Suit to Sprint’s network
`
`operations, and acting as Sprint’s agent, Deutsche Telekom engaged in discussions with IPCom
`
`over a license for Sprint’s activities. Deutsche Telekom made the decision to refuse to take a
`
`license and abate the infringement, thereby forcing IPCom to file suit to redress the Defendants’
`
`patent infringement. For at least the foregoing reasons, exercising jurisdiction over Deutsche
`
`Telekom in this district is consistent with the United States Constitution and laws.
`
`18.
`
`Sprint maintains a significant physical presence in this judicial district. For
`
`example, there are numerous Sprint retail stores within this judicial district, including in Allen,
`
`Beaumont, Canton, Denton, Flower Mound, Frisco, Lufkin, Marshall, McKinney, Nacogdoches,
`
`Paris, Plano, Sulphur Springs, Texarkana, and Tyler, Texas. These stores are branded with
`
`Sprint signage and trademarks for the benefit of the shopping public. Sprint uses these stores to
`
`sell telecommunications services that infringe the Patents-in-Suit. These stores are physical
`
`places within the district, are regular and established places of business, and are Sprint’s places.
`
`For at least these reasons, venue is proper in this judicial district. Sprint resides in this judicial
`
`district within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Sprint has committed infringement acts
`
`within this district and has regular and established places of business here.
`
`19.
`
`As a foreign corporation, venue is proper for Deutsche Telekom in this district.
`
`28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,333,822
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 6 of 35 PageID #: 6
`
`20.
`
`On February 19, 2008, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”
`
`or “PTO”) issued U.S. Patent No. 7,333,822, entitled “Method for Transmitting Messages in a
`
`Telecommunication Network.” A true and correct copy of U.S. Patent No. 7,333,822 is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.
`
`21.
`
`On July 16, 2008, a third party requester, HTC Corp. filed a request for Inter
`
`Partes Reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 7,333,822, and the PTO instituted reexamination
`
`pursuant to Inter Partes Reexamination Control No. 95/001,211. During this reexamination, the
`
`patent owner amended some of the claims, canceled other claims, and added new claims. The
`
`PTO Examiner subsequently determined that claims 1, 17, 22 and 27-48 are patentable over all
`
`of the prior art cited during the original examination and reexamination. The third-party
`
`requester then filed an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). On May 30,
`
`2013, the PTAB issued a Decision on Appeal affirming the Examiner’s determination that these
`
`claims are patentable. On September 13, 2013, the PTO issued Inter Partes Reexamination
`
`Certificate Number 7,333,822 C1, which is now part of the ’822 patent.
`
`22.
`
`IPCom is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’822
`
`Patent, including the right to assert all causes of action arising under said patent and the right to
`
`any and all remedies for infringement, including past damages.
`
`23.
`
`The invention of the ’822 Patent pertains to methods for transmitting messages in
`
`a mobile telecommunications network that can utilize two kinds of message services, such as: a
`
`short message service (“SMS”) and a multimedia messaging service (“MMS”). See ’822 Patent,
`
`4:23-29. Such networks may comprise telecommunications equipment including Multimedia
`
`Messaging Service Centers (“MMSCs”), Short Message Service Centers (“SMSCs”), wireless
`
`base stations, and mobile phones. Id., 2:27-30, 2:66-3:31. The invention of the ’822 Patent is
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 7 of 35 PageID #: 7
`
`designed, inter alia, to solve certain technical problems affecting message transmission. Id. For
`
`example, in order to transmit messages, telecommunications equipment needs to set up a
`
`“connection” (or “session”). Id., 4:25-29. However, setting up these connections requires
`
`certain “overhead” defined by the use of network resources, including “bandwidth” and
`
`“signaling” resources. Id., 4:25-29, 4:64-5:6. Among other things, the invention of the ’822
`
`Patent reduces the amount of overhead needed to transmit messages within the network. Id.
`
`This improves efficiency and capacity.
`
`24.
`
`The ’822 Patent claims are directed to patent-eligible, non-abstract ideas in that
`
`they provide technical solutions to at least the technical problems described above. The claims
`
`relate to the sending of a dedicated MMS message using a short message of the SMS service,
`
`wherein the short message may include: a header portion, a data portion having an identification
`
`of a type of the dedicated MMS message, and also an identifier for indicating a presence of the
`
`dedicated MMS message in the data portion of the short message. Id., 5:50-8:34. In one
`
`embodiment, the short message carries a dedicated MMS notification message, which may
`
`indicate the presence of another type of MMS message on an MMS server in the
`
`telecommunications network. Id., 6:55-7:60. By using the short message to send the dedicated
`
`MMS notification message, the telecommunications network is able to dispense with the
`
`“overhead” associated with “setting up a connection/session.” Id., 4:25-29, 4:67-5:6. The ’822
`
`Patent further explains that by employing the claimed methods, no “additional signaling for
`
`transmitting notifications” is required, and therefore network bandwidth and signaling resources
`
`are conserved. Id., 4:67-5:6. Thus, the claimed inventions are directed to patent-eligible, non-
`
`abstract ideas because they improve the overall functioning of a telecommunications system.
`
`Further, the methods claimed in the ’822 Patent cannot be performed as mental steps by a
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 8 of 35 PageID #: 8
`
`human, nor do they represent the application of a generic computer to any well-known method of
`
`organizing human behavior.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,382,909
`
`25.
`
`On August 13, 2019, the PTO issued United States Patent No. 10,382,909,
`
`entitled “Method for Transmitting Messages in a Telecommunications Network.” A true and
`
`correct copy of the ’909 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this
`
`reference.
`
`26.
`
`The ’909 Patent is a Division of application No. 11/975,428, which is a
`
`continuation of the ’822 Patent. See ’909 Patent, cover page. The ’909 Patent and the ’822
`
`Patent share the same figures and written description. During examination of the ’909 Patent,
`
`the Examiner reviewed the art cited during prosecution of the ’822 Patent, the art cited in the
`
`Inter Partes Reexamination of the ’822 Patent, Control No. 95/001,211, and the PTAB’s
`
`Decision on Appeal in the reexamination of the ’822 Patent. The Examiner subsequently
`
`determined the claims of the ’909 Patent to be patentable.
`
`27.
`
`IPCom is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’909
`
`Patent, including the right to assert all causes of action arising under said patent and the right to
`
`any and all remedies for infringement, including past damages.
`
`28.
`
`The ’909 Patent describes, inter alia, methods and apparatus for use in
`
`transmitting messages in a mobile telecommunications network that provides SMS and MMS
`
`services using MMSCs, SMSCs, wireless base stations, and mobile phones. See ’909 Patent,
`
`3:3-34, 7:39-52, 8:12-9:26. The invention of the ’909 Patent solves technical problems involving
`
`the transmission of messages. Id. In order to transmit the messages, the telecommunications
`
`equipment needs to set up a “connection” (or “session”), but setting up these connections
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 9 of 35 PageID #: 9
`
`requires certain “overhead” defined by use of network resources, including “bandwidth”
`
`resources. Id., 4:11-63. The invention of the ’909 Patent reduces the amount of overhead
`
`needed to send messages. Id. This improves the efficiency and capacity of the network.
`
`29.
`
`The ’909 Patent claims are directed to patent-eligible, non-abstract ideas because
`
`they provide technical solutions to the technical problems described above. The claims relate to
`
`sending a dedicated MMS message using a short message of the SMS service. Id., 4:11-5:13. In
`
`one embodiment, the short message carries a dedicated MMS notification message, which may
`
`indicate the presence of another type of MMS message on an MMS server in the
`
`telecommunications network. See id.; see also id., 6:30-7:29. By using the short message to
`
`send the dedicated MMS notification message, the telecommunications network is able to
`
`dispense with the “overhead” associated with “setting up a connection/session.” Id., 4:11-63.
`
`The ’909 Patent further explains that by employing the claimed methods, no “additional
`
`signaling for transmitting notifications” is required, and therefore the network bandwidth and
`
`signaling resources are conserved. Id. Thus, the claimed inventions are also directed to patent-
`
`eligible, non-abstract ideas because they improve the overall functioning of a
`
`telecommunications system. Further, the methods claimed in the ’909 Patent cannot be
`
`performed as mental steps by a human, nor do they represent the application of a generic
`
`computer to any well-known method of organizing human behavior.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,813,261
`
`30.
`
`On November 2, 2004, the PTO issued United States Patent Number 6,813,261,
`
`entitled “Method of Mobile Communication and Apparatus Therefor.” IPCom is the assignee
`
`and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’261 Patent, including the right to assert all
`
`causes of action arising under said patent and the right to any and all remedies for infringement,
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 10 of 35 PageID #: 10
`
`including past damages. A true and correct copy of the ’261 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`C and incorporated herein by this reference.
`
`31.
`
`In general, the ’261 Patent describes methods and apparatuses for initiating and
`
`establishing “efficient communication of data between a base station and a plurality of mobile
`
`terminals” in a cellular network. See, e.g., ’261 Patent at Abstract. The invention includes, for
`
`example, a base station that “receiv[es] an alert signal from a mobile terminal,” “evaluat[es] the
`
`alert signal for the presence of a particular code by comparing the alert signal with a plurality of
`
`codes,” and “if the particular code is present, transmit[s] an alert response to the mobile terminal,
`
`the alert response containing data corresponding to the particular code.” Id. at 19:9-20:3.
`
`32.
`
`The ’261 Patent claims relate to technical solutions to technical problems that
`
`arise in the design and implementation of traditional cellular networks. More particularly, the
`
`patent identifies several technical drawbacks of prior art systems, including, for example:
`
`
`
`
`
`“In the above-mentioned conventional mobile communication system…a plurality
`of reservation packets collide in the base station when the reservation packets are
`transmitted from a plurality of mobile terminals to the base station, and the contents
`of the reservation packets cannot be correctly read out in the base station. Therefore,
`the mobile terminals must transmit reservation packets again. In order to transmit
`the reservation package again as described above, waiting times are set in random
`fashion so that the reservation packages will not collide again. When the reservation
`packets collide, the transmission efficiency of data greatly decreases.” Id., 1:58-
`2:2.
`
`“Furthermore, in the above-mentioned conventional mobile communications
`system…data for making a reservation are transmitted and received in addition to
`the data that are to be transmitted. Therefore, a ratio for the data that are desired to
`be transmitted decreases in the whole data that are transmitted and received
`between the base station and the mobile terminals. When the consecutive data are
`to be transmitted being divided into a plurality of data packages…, in particular, a
`reservation packet is transmitted for the transmission of each data packet, and the
`packets occupy a large ratio in the whole data transmitted and received between the
`base station and the mobile terminal.” Id., 2:3-16. As a result, “the ratio for the
`data that are desired to be transmitted becomes low with respect to the entire
`amount of data” and “the communication capacity of data decreases by an amount
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 11 of 35 PageID #: 11
`
`corresponding to the electric power of transmitting the reservation packets.” Id., 2:
`48-50, 2:62-67.
`
`33.
`
`The ’261 Patent claims are directed to a patent-eligible, non-abstract idea as they
`
`relate to technical solutions to overcome at least the above described problems. For example, the
`
`patent identifies numerous advantages that the claimed techniques provide compared to
`
`traditional cellular networks. See, e.g., ’261 Patent, 3:1-7:15 (describing “representative
`
`examples of methods and apparatuses” which provide technology capable of (1) “efficiently
`
`transmitting and receiving data between the base station and a plurality of mobile terminals”; (2)
`
`“detecting the individual alert signals even when a plurality of alert signals are transmitted from
`
`a plurality of mobile terminals to the base station”; and (3) “maintaining, at a low level, the value
`
`of the alert signals transmitted from the mobile terminals”). The claimed techniques enhance the
`
`process for initiating and establishing data transfer between multiple mobile terminals and a base
`
`station, and therefore, improve the function of a computer and computer communication systems
`
`within cellular networks. The methods claimed in the ’261 Patent cannot be performed as mental
`
`steps by a human, nor do they represent the application of a generic computer to any well-known
`
`method of organizing human behavior.
`
`34.
`
`The ’261 Patent claims inventive concepts that are significantly more than any
`
`patent-ineligible, abstract idea. In particular, the claimed technology, including individual
`
`limitations as well as ordered combinations of limitations, were not well-understood, routine, or
`
`conventional, and cover multiple advantages, and combinations of advantages, that were not
`
`well-understood, routine, or conventional. See, e.g., id. at 1:30-7:10.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,006,463
`
`35.
`
`On February 28, 2006, the PTO issued United States Patent Number 7,006,463,
`
`entitled, “CDMA Communication System and Its Transmission Power Control Method.” IPCom
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 12 of 35 PageID #: 12
`
`is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’463 Patent, including the
`
`right to assert any and all causes of action arising under said patent and the right to any remedies
`
`for infringement, including past damages. A true and correct copy of the ’463 Patent is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference.
`
`36.
`
`In general, the ’463 Patent pertains to methods and apparatuses for providing
`
`“uplink channel transmission power control” in a CDMA telecommunications network. See,
`
`e.g., ’463 Patent at Abstract. Since “mobile terminals share the same frequency band to
`
`communicate with a single base station” uplink power control is important to limit unwanted
`
`interference in the communication channel. Id. at 1:19-31. The invention of the ’463 Patent
`
`provides for improved uplink power control involving, for example, transmitting power control
`
`signals to multiple “mobile terminals by using [a] common channel shared by the mobile
`
`terminals.” See, e.g., ’463 Patent at Abstract.
`
`37.
`
`The invention of the ’463 Patent provides technical solutions to technical
`
`problems in conventional power control methods. Traditional transmission power control
`
`methods (e.g., for voice-only) operate under the assumption that there exists a pair of uplink and
`
`downlink traffic channels. Id. at 2:40-47. As the patent explains: “[i]f a paired downlink
`
`channel is provided only for the transmission power control of the uplink traffic channel, one
`
`downlink traffic channel is occupied by the transmission power control of only the uplink traffic
`
`channel. The use efficiency of traffic channels is lowered.” Id. at 2:48-52.
`
`38.
`
`The ’463 Patent claims are directed to a patent-eligible, non-abstract idea. To
`
`solve the above described technical problem in the prior art, the patent describes “a single
`
`downlink traffic channel common for all mobile stations,” which allows a base station to control
`
`the transmission power of a plurality of mobile stations without consuming capacity on
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 13 of 35 PageID #: 13
`
`individual downlink traffic channels, thereby increasing network efficiency. Id. at 2:53-57; see
`
`also id. at 10:10-25, 10:59-11:10. The ’463 Patent’s claimed techniques improve the
`
`performance and function of communication systems and cannot be performed as mental steps
`
`by a human, nor do they represent the application of a generic computer to any well-known
`
`method of organizing human behavior.
`
`39.
`
`The ’463 Patent claims inventive concepts that are significantly more than any
`
`patent-ineligible, abstract idea. In particular, the claimed technology, including individual
`
`limitations as well as ordered combinations of limitations, were not well-understood, routine, or
`
`conventional, and cover multiple advantages, and combinations of advantages, that were not
`
`well-understood, routine, or conventional. See, e.g., id. at 2:40-57.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,983,147
`
`40.
`
`On January 3, 2006, the PTO issued United States Patent Number 6,983,147,
`
`entitled “Method of transmitting signaling information, a master station, a mobile station and
`
`message elements.” IPCom is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the
`
`’147 Patent, including the right to assert all causes of action arising under said patent and the
`
`right to any and all remedies for infringement, including past damages. A true and correct copy
`
`of the ’147 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference
`
`41.
`
`In general, the ’147 Patent describes methods and apparatuses for “transmitting
`
`signaling information between a master station and a slave station.” See ’147 Patent at Abstract.
`
`For example, “a message, which contains information regarding whether data to be sent is
`
`processed in the master station to increase the reception quality of this data at the slave station, is
`
`transmitted with the signaling information from the master station to the slave station” in a
`
`cellular network. See id. The invention may include, for example, a “transmitting station” that
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 14 of 35 PageID #: 14
`
`“transmit[s] information” “regarding whether data to be sent is processed by an additional
`
`transmitting station,” which is “successively assigned to the receiving station to increase a
`
`reception quality at the receiving station in accordance with measures relating to a transmission
`
`channel between the receiving station and as least one of the transmitting station and the
`
`additional transmitting station.” Id., 22:65-23:6.
`
`42.
`
`The ’147 Patent claims technical solutions to technical problems in the design and
`
`implementation of cellular networks, such as when initiating data transfers between multiple
`
`transmitters and a single mobile receiver. The ’147 Patent specification identifies technical
`
`drawbacks of traditional cellular networks, including at least, for example “that it is not known in
`
`the mobile station whether or not the base station is transmitting the data predistorted over the at
`
`least one specially allocated transmission channel. Therefore, the mobile station cannot decide
`
`whether or not it must eliminate distortion from the data received by the base station over the
`
`specially set-up transmission channel.” Id., 1:31-37.
`
`43.
`
`The ’147 Patent claims are directed to a patent-eligible, non-abstract idea. They
`
`cover technical solutions to improve computer and electronic communications between cellular
`
`transmitters and receivers. For example, the patent identifies numerous specific advantages that
`
`the claimed techniques provide compared to traditional cellular networks. See, e.g., id. at 1:41-
`
`64 (describing “example method[s] according to the present invention” which provide
`
`technology capable of at least (1) “[S]etting up a transmission channel from the master station to
`
`the slave station, the slave station is able to decide how it may detect the data to be sent by the
`
`master station or the data to be sent by the other master station downstream from and assigned to
`
`the slave station in order to be able to guarantee optimum data reception”; (2) “If the slave
`
`station determines that the data to be sent by the corresponding master station has already been
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 15 of 35 PageID #: 15
`
`processed in the corresponding master station, then it may omit a complicated distortion
`
`elimination because the data will arrive at the slave station with a suitably increased reception
`
`quality”; and (3) “Power consumption at the slave station may be minimized in this manner,
`
`which may be advantageous when configuring the slave station as a mobile station with battery
`
`operation”). Further, the claimed technologies cannot be performed as mental steps by a human,
`
`nor do they represent the application of a generic computer to any well-known method of
`
`organizing human behavior.
`
`44.
`
`The ’147 Patent claims inventive concepts that are significantly more than any
`
`patent-ineligible, abstract idea. In particular, the claimed technology, including individual
`
`limitations as well as ordered combinations of limitations, were not well-understood, routine, or
`
`conventional, and cover multiple advantages, and combinations of advantages, that were not
`
`well-understood, routine, or conventional. See, e.g., id. at 22:62-23:16.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`IPCom
`
`45.
`
`IPCom is an intellectual property licensing and research & development
`
`company. Since its founding in 2007, IPCom has been committed to innovation in the wireless
`
`communications market. IPCom creates inventions and files patent applications for those
`
`inventions, collaborates with others to develop and patent inventions, and acquires and licenses
`
`patents from individual inventors and other institutions.
`
`46.
`
`IPCom’s current patent portfolio encompasses over 200 patent families in the
`
`field of mobile communications, with more than 1,000 patents registered in Europe, the US and
`
`Asia.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 16 of 35 PageID #: 16
`
`47.
`
`Research and development are core to IPCom’s philosophy and approach.
`
`IPCom’s research and development (“R&D”) team is made up of pioneering scientists and
`
`engineers and is continuously looking for ways to develop and enhance mobile technologies. In
`
`the past, IPCom’s R&D has contributed to the evolution of UMTS to LTE and further to LTE-A.
`
`Currently, IPCom plays an active role in evolving 5G cellular technology.
`
`48.
`
`IPCom also offers IP consulting services (“Consulting Services”) to assist
`
`companies in the development of ideas and new innovations. IPCom’s Consulting Services
`
`helps inventors transform ideas into successful inventions with real world applications and a
`
`tangible market value. IPCom works closely with inventors to safeguard their ideas and
`
`maximize the value of their innovation.
`
`49.
`
`IPCom is dedicated to maintaining industry standards and continues to collaborate
`
`with industry standards setting organizations and third parties to make key contributions to
`
`industry bodies including 3GPP, OMA, ETSI, OMTP, Bluetooth SIG, and TCG.
`
`Deutsche Telekom
`
`50.
`
`Sprint merged with the former T-Mobile on April 1, 2020. Deutsche Telekom has
`
`voting control of approximately 68% of the merged company’s shares. As of the date of this
`
`filing, Deutsche Telecom continues to possess voting control over a majority of the shares of the
`
`merged company. Upon the merger, Deutsche Telekom also gained the right to appoint 9 of 14
`
`directors, and Deutsche Telecom’s CEO, Timotheus Höttges, has become the Chairman of the
`
`Board of the merged entity.
`
`51.
`
`Deutsche Telekom possesses control over the merged entity, including its Sprint
`
`subsidiaries. Indeed, in a press release issued by Deutsche Telekom on April 1, 2020, the
`
`company represented that, “[t]hese agreements concerning the voting rights and the appointment
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00321-JRG Document 1 Filed 10/01/20 Page 17 of 35 PageID #: 17
`
`of members of the Board of Management enable Deutsche Teleko