`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et
`al.,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS,
`LLC, D/B/A XFINITY, et al.,
`
`Lead Case No. 2:23-cv-00059-JRG
`Member Case No. 2:23-cv-00062-JRG
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.’S NOTICE
`OF NON-OPPOSITION TO COMCAST’S MOTION TO DISMISS
`PRE-SUIT WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’751 AND ’934 PATENTS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 43 Filed 04/25/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 1263
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Touchstream Technologies, Inc. (“Touchstream”) submits this Notice of Non-
`
`Opposition to Comcast’s Motion to Dismiss claims of pre-suit willful infringement as to the ’751
`
`and ’934 Patents. The issues raised in Comcast’s Motion were already decided in Comcast’s favor
`
`in the Court’s March 14, 2024, Order.1 See Touchstream Techs., Inc. v. Altice USA, Inc. et al., No.
`
`EDTX-2-23-cv-00060, ECF 156 at pp. 5-6, 8. As such, Touchstream’s Second Amended
`
`Complaint only added factual support for its claims of pre-suit willful infringement of the ’251
`
`patent. While Touchstream respectfully maintains the arguments made in its Response to
`
`Comcast’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 83), Touchstream understands that its claims of pre-suit willful
`
`infringement as to the ’751 and ’934 Patents remain dismissed pursuant to the Court’s March 14,
`
`2024 Order.2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Touchstream recognizes that its Second Amended Complaint reiterates the claims of pre-suit
`willful infringement of the ’751 and ’934 patents included in its First Amended Complaint. Aside
`from supplementing the factual basis for pre-suit willful infringement of the ’251 Patent,
`Touchstream avoided adding or removing content from its Second Amended Complaint so as not
`to exceed the scope of amendment permitted by the Court’s March 14, 2024, Order.
`
` 2
`
` Because fact discovery is ongoing, Touchstream reserves the right to move for leave to amend
`its Complaint for good cause in the event Touchstream discovers evidence supporting Comcast’s
`pre-suit knowledge of the ’751 and ’934 Patents.
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 43 Filed 04/25/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 1264
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`/s/ Ryan Dykal
`
`Ryan Dykal (Pro Hac Vice)
`Philip Eckert (Pro Hac Vice)
`Jordan Bergsten (Pro Hac Vice)
`Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
`2555 Grand Boulevard
`Kansas City, MO 64108
`Phone: (816) 474-6550
`Fax: (816) 421-5547
`Email: rdykal@shb.com
`Email: peckert@shb.com
`Email: jbergsten@shb.com
`
`Robert H. Reckers (State Bar No. 24039520)
`Anita Liu (State Bar No. 24134054)
`Andrew M. Long (State Bar No. 24123079)
`Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
`JPMorgan Chase Tower
`600 Travis St, Suite 3400
`Houston, TX 77002-2926
`Phone: (713) 227-8008
`Fax: (713) 227-9508
`Email: rreckers@shb.com
`Email: aliu@shb.com
`Email: amlong@shb.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`Touchstream Technologies, Inc.
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: April 25, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 43 Filed 04/25/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 1265
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that, on April 25, 2024, all counsel of record who are deemed to have
`
`consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document through the Court’s
`
`CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Ryan Dykal
` Ryan Dykal
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
