Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 1 of 51 PageID #: 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`Case No. 2:23-cv-359
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`
`
`Infogation Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`
`Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota
`Motor North America, Inc., Toyota
`Motor Engineering &
`Manufacturing North America, Inc.,
`and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.,
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Infogation Corporation (“Infogation” or “Plaintiff”) hereby files this Original Complaint for
`
`Patent Infringement against Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota
`
`Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
`
`(“Toyota” or “Defendant”), and alleges, upon information and belief, as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Infogation Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
`
`Texas with its principal place of business at 1409 Constellation Drive, Allen, Texas 75013.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation (“TMC”) is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan with a principal place of
`
`business at 1 Toyota-cho, Toyota City, Aichi Prefecture 471-8571, Japan. On information
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 2 of 51 PageID #: 2
`
`and belief, TMC does business itself, or through its subsidiaries, affiliates, and agents, in the
`
`State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Toyota Motor North America, Inc. (“TMNA”) is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its
`
`principal place of business at 6565 Headquarters Drive W1-3C, Plano, Texas 75024. On
`
`information and belief, TMNA is the wholly owned operating subsidiary of TMC and is
`
`responsible for all operations of TMC in the United States, including research and
`
`development, manufacturing, sales, offers for sale, marketing, importation, and distribution
`
`of automotive vehicles from Toyota-managed brands (e.g., Toyota, Lexus, and Scion).
`
`According to its website, TMNA is “headquartered in Plano, Texas, [and] brings together
`
`Toyota’s marketing, sales, engineering and manufacturing arms in North America on one
`
`shared, state-of-the-art campus.” (https://www.toyota.com/usa/operations/map.html#!/tcal).
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North
`
`America, Inc. (“TEMA”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
`
`of Kentucky with its principal place of business at 6565 Headquarters Drive W1-3C, Plano,
`
`Texas 75024. On information and belief, TEMA is a wholly owned subsidiary of TMC and
`
`is responsible for research and development and manufacturing of automotive vehicles from
`
`Toyota-managed brands (e.g., Toyota and Lexus) in the United States. According to its
`
`website, TEMA “is responsible for engineering design and development, R&D and
`
`manufacturing activities in the U.S.… and is also responsible for manufacturing plants
`
`across
`
`North
`
`America”
`
`including
`
`in
`
`the
`
`State
`
`of
`
`Texas.
`
`(https://www.toyota.com/usa/operations#!/Engineering-Manufacturing).
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 3 of 51 PageID #: 3
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (“TMS”) is a
`
`corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its
`
`principal place of business at 6565 Headquarters Drive W1-3C, Plano, Texas 75024. On
`
`information and belief, TMS is a wholly owned subsidiary of TMC and is responsible for
`
`sales, marketing, and distribution of automotive vehicles from Toyota-managed brands (e.g.,
`
`Toyota and Lexus) in the United States.
`
`6.
`
`On information and belief, Toyota designs, manufactures, distributes, imports, offers for
`
`sale, and/or sells in the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas automotive vehicles
`
`and components thereof that infringe the Patents-in-Suit, contributes to inducement by
`
`others, and/or induces others to commit acts of patent infringement in the State of Texas and
`
`the Eastern District of Texas. Toyota has regular and established places of business, at
`
`which it has committed acts of infringement and placed the accused products into the stream
`
`of commerce, throughout the State of Texas and the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United States,
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 1, et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331 and 1338(a).
`
`8.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Defendant regularly conducts business
`
`and has committed acts of patent infringement and/or has induced acts of patent
`
`infringement by others in this Judicial District and/or has contributed to patent infringement
`
`by others in this Judicial District, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`9.
`
`This Court has at least specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has
`
`substantial contacts and conducts business in the State of Texas and in this District and has
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 4 of 51 PageID #: 4
`
`been infringing, contributing to the infringement of and/or actively inducing others to
`
`infringe claims of the Patents-in-Suit (defined below) in Texas and elsewhere by virtue of its
`
`manufacture and importing of automobiles with Toyota’s Audio Multimedia system,
`
`including through its subsidiary distributors as alleged.
`
`10.
`
`Defendant’s control and contractual relationship with its subsidiaries located in this District
`
`to sell or at the least import and sell Defendant’s products within the United States is alone
`
`sufficient to establish minimum contacts with the United States. Defendant, through its
`
`website, shows it retains control over directing its customers to its U.S. distributor for the
`
`Accused Instrumentalities (defined below).
`
`11.
`
`Defendant directly conducts business extensively throughout the State of Texas, by
`
`distributing, making, using, offering for sale, selling, and advertising its products and
`
`services in the State of Texas and in this District. Defendant has purposefully and
`
`voluntarily made its business services, including the infringing systems and services,
`
`available to residents of this District and into the stream of commerce with the intention and
`
`expectation that they will be purchased and/or used by consumers in this District.
`
`12.
`
`Venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas as to Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation
`
`pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) and 1400(b), as well as under the “alien
`
`venue rule.” Brunette Machine Works, Ltd. v. Kockum Indus., Inc., 406 U.S. 706 (1972); In
`
`re HTC Corp., 889 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2018); Weatherford Tech. v. Tesco Corp., 2018 WL
`
`5315206 at *2-3 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 26, 2018). As noted above, Defendant Toyota Motor
`
`Corporation is a foreign entity which maintains a regular and established business presence
`
`in the United States.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 5 of 51 PageID #: 5
`
`13.
`
`Venue is also proper in this District as to Defendants Toyota Motor North America, Inc.,
`
`Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales,
`
`U.S.A., Inc. pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c)(2) and 1400(b). As noted above,
`
`Defendant Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing
`
`North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. maintain a regular and
`
`established business presence in this District.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff is the sole and exclusive owner, by assignment, of U.S. Patent 10,107,628 (the
`
`“’628 Patent”), U.S. Patent 8,898,003 (the “’003 Patent”), U.S. Patent 8,406,994 (the “’994
`
`Patent”) and U.S. Patent 6,292,743 (the “’743 Patent”) (hereinafter collectively referred to
`
`as the “Patents-in-Suit”).
`
`15.
`
`By written instruments executed, Plaintiff is assigned all rights, title, and interest in the
`
`Patents-in-Suit. As such, Plaintiff has sole and exclusive standing to assert the Patents-in-
`
`Suit and to bring these causes of action.
`
`16.
`
`The Patents-in-Suit are valid, enforceable, and were duly issued in full compliance with
`
`Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`17.
`
`The Patents-in-Suit have been cited in over 200 patents issued to well-known industry
`
`leaders, including industry giants Toyota, Google, Microsoft, Garmin, Honda, TomTom,
`
`Aol, Mapquest, Facebook, Verizon, Sprint, Cisco, Samsung, NEC, Nokia, Alcatel, Pioneer,
`
`Phillips, Lucent, IBM, Intel, Motorola, Sony, Toshiba and Kaarta.
`
`18.
`
`The Patents-in-Suit each include numerous claims defining distinct inventions. No single
`
`claim is representative of any other.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 6 of 51 PageID #: 6
`
`19.
`
`The priority date of the ’628 Patent is at least as early as August 11, 2007. It generally
`
`relates to the area of Global Positioning System (GPS), and, in particular, to navigation on
`
`non-linearly scaled maps and how to display such non-linearly scaled maps with proper
`
`colors on a display screen. As of the priority dates, the inventions as claimed were novel,
`
`non-obvious, unconventional, and non-routine. Indeed, the Patents-in-Suit overcame a
`
`number of specific technological problems in the industry and provided specific
`
`technological solutions.
`
`20.
`
`The priority date of the ’003 Patent and the ’994 Patent is at least as early as November 7,
`
`2008. The ’003 Patent and the ’994 Patent generally relate to the area of Global Positioning
`
`System (GPS). In particular, the present invention is related to electronically generated map
`
`with one or more objects therein being realistic. As of the priority dates, the inventions as
`
`claimed were novel, non-obvious, unconventional, and non-routine. Indeed, the Patents-in-
`
`Suit overcame a number of specific technological problems in the industry and provided
`
`specific technological solutions.
`
`21.
`
`The priority date of the ’743 Patent is at least as early as January 6, 1999. It generally relates
`
`to a mobile navigation system and apparatus, and more particularly to a distributed
`
`navigation system having a wireless connection to a server for calculating optimal routes
`
`using real-time data. As of the priority dates, the inventions as claimed were novel, non-
`
`obvious, unconventional, and non-routine. Indeed, the Patents-in-Suit overcame a number
`
`of specific technological problems in the industry and provided specific technological
`
`solutions.
`
`22.
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, 102, 103, and
`
`112, as reflected by the fact that three different Patent Examiners all agreed and allowed the
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 7 of 51 PageID #: 7
`
`Patents-in-Suit over extensive prior art as disclosed and of record during the prosecution of
`
`the Patents-in-Suit. See Stone Basket Innov., 892 F.3d at 1179 (“when prior art is listed on
`
`the face of a patent, the examiner is presumed to have considered it”) (citing Shire LLC v.
`
`Amneal Pharm., LLC, 802 F.3d 1301, 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2015)); Exmark Mfg. v. Briggs &
`
`Stratton, 879 F.3d 1332, 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
`
`23.
`
`After giving full proper credit to the prior art and having conducted a thorough search for all
`
`relevant art and having fully considered the most relevant art known at the time, the United
`
`States Patent Examiners allowed all of the claims of the Patents-in-Suit to issue. In so
`
`doing, it is presumed that Examiners used their knowledge of the art when examining the
`
`claims. See K/S Himpp v. Hear-Wear Techs., LLC, 751 F.3d 1362, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
`
`It is further presumed that Patent Examiners had experience in the field of the invention, and
`
`that the Patent Examiners properly acted in accordance with a person of ordinary skill. In re
`
`Sang Su Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
`
`24.
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are novel and non-obvious, including over all non-cited art
`
`that is merely cumulative with the referenced and cited prior art. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.56(b)
`
`(information is material to patentability when it is not cumulative to information already of
`
`record in the application); see also AbbVie Deutschland GmbH v. Janssen Biotech, 759 F.3d
`
`1285, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2014); In re DBC, 545 F.3d 1373, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Likewise,
`
`the claims of the ’628 Patent are novel and non-obvious, including over all non-cited
`
`contemporaneous state of the art systems and methods, all of which would have been known
`
`to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and which were therefore presumptively also known
`
`and considered by the Examiners. See, e.g., St. Clair I.P. Consultants v. Canon, Inc., 2011
`
`WL 66166 at *6 (Fed. Cir. 2011); In re Sang Su Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2002);
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 8 of 51 PageID #: 8
`
`In re Koninklijke Philips Patent Litigation, 2020 WL 7392868 at *19 (N.D. Cal. 2020);
`
`Standard Oil v. American Cyanamid, 774 F.2d 448, 454 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (persons of
`
`ordinary skill are presumed to be aware of all pertinent prior art).
`
`THE ACCUSED INSTRUMENTALITIES
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, sells, advertises, offers for sale, uses, or
`
`25.
`
`otherwise provides an apparatus and method for navigation systems covered by the Patents-
`
`in-Suit, including but not limited to, Toyota’s Audio Multimedia system included in
`
`personal vehicles, in all trims and configurations, such as listed in Exhibit A, among other
`
`vehicles, including all augmentations to these platforms or descriptions of platforms (the
`
`“Accused Instrumentalities”).
`
`See, https://www.toyota.com/connected-services/ (emphasis added) (screenshot of
`Defendant’s website describing and showing Toyota’s Audio Multimedia system with
`maps).
`
`
`
`
`
`26.
`
`27.
`
`COUNT I
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,107,628
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs by reference.
`
`Defendant has been on actual notice of the ’628 Patent at least as early as the date it
`
`received service of the Original Complaint in this litigation.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 9 of 51 PageID #: 9
`
`28.
`
`Plaintiff or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to
`
`collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’628
`
`patent, thus the damages period begins at least as early as six years prior to the date of
`
`service of the Original Complaint in this litigation.
`
`29.
`
`Defendant manufactures, sells, offers for sale, owns, directs, and/or controls the operation of
`
`the Accused Instrumentalities and generates substantial financial revenues and benefits
`
`therefrom.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the claims of the ’628
`
`Patent. As exemplary, Claim 1 is infringed by making, using, importing, selling, and/or
`
`offering for sale the Accused Instrumentalities. Defendant directly makes and sells the
`
`infringing Accused Instrumentalities at least because it is solely responsible for putting the
`
`infringing systems into service by directing or controlling the systems as a whole and by
`
`obtaining the benefits therefrom. More specifically, and on information and belief and as
`
`represented in the videos and figures above and below, with respect to the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities, Defendant:
`
`•
`
`(i) practices and provides downloading from a network into a computing device an
`
`artistic map, the artistic map being non-linearly scaled and including various objects
`
`being exaggeratedly shown on the computing device to facilitate a user using the
`
`computing device to view and select one of the objects to navigate thereto in the
`
`artistic map, wherein the computing device is portable, equipped with navigation
`
`capability and provides a traveling guidance based on a geographical map, the artistic
`
`map is not used directly by the computing device for navigation, each of the objects is
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 10 of 51 PageID #: 10
`
`represented by a plurality of points on a display of the computing device, and the
`
`geographical map is not being displayed on the display;
`
`See, https://www.toyota.ca/toyota/en/about/connected-services/multimedia
`
`See, https://www.toyota.com/connected-services/ (emphasis added)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 11 of 51 PageID #: 11
`
`See, https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyotas-all-new-audio-multimedia-system-is-here-and-it-is-a-game-
`changer/ (emphasis added)
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page
`139)(emphasis added) (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page
`144)(emphasis added)
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 12 of 51 PageID #: 12
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 144)
`(annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 1:40) (annotated)
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 13 of 51 PageID #: 13
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 1:45) (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 28)
`(emphasis added) (annotated)
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`13
`
`An artistic map (3D Map) is displayed on the
`Toyota’s multimedia system screen having
`objects such as buildings, landmarks, etc.
`
`Zoom-in and Zoom-out button
`are available to switch between
`artistic maps and regular 2D
`geographical maps.
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 14 of 51 PageID #: 14
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 29)
`(emphasis added)
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page
`29)(emphasis added)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 15 of 51 PageID #: 15
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 0:43) (annotated)
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 0:52) (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`15
`
`Button to change between 2D
`and 3D artistic maps.
`
`Objects like building and points of interest can be selected
`from the map screen directly showing the full-route on the
`map screen.
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 16 of 51 PageID #: 16
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 147)
`(annotated)
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 147)
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 17 of 51 PageID #: 17
`
`
`
`See, https://www.toyota.com/connected-services/drive-connect/ (emphasis added) [FAQ Drive connect]
`
`
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page
`46)(emphasis added)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 18 of 51 PageID #: 18
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdFC-2cdFq0 (runtime 1:08) (annotated)
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 19 of 51 PageID #: 19
`
`See, https://apps.apple.com/us/app/toyota/id1455685357 (emphasis added)
`
`
`
`•
`
`(ii) practices and provides receiving in the computing device a selection on the one of
`
`the objects from the user as a selected object;
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 20 of 51 PageID #: 20
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 1:40) (annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjOMAnpNTY (runtime 1:45) (annotated)
`
`•
`
`(iii) practices and provides determining by the computing device a pair of coordinates
`
`for one of the points on the selected object;
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`20
`
`An artistic map (3D Map) is displayed on the
`Toyota’s multimedia system screen having
`objects such as buildings, landmarks, etc.
`
`Zoom-in and Zoom-out button
`are available to switch between
`artistic maps and regular 2D
`geographical maps.
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 21 of 51 PageID #: 21
`
`
`See, https://support.toyota.com/s/article/How-does-the-navigati-10380?language=en_US (emphasis
`added)
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 29)
`(emphasis added)
`
`•
`
`(iv) practices and provides transforming in the computing device the pair of
`
`
`
`coordinates to a physical point represented by a pair of latitude and longitude in the
`
`geographical map not being shown on the display, the points representing the selected
`
`object having different pairs of coordinates, but all of the different pairs of
`
`coordinates for the selected object corresponding substantially to the physical point
`
`when said transforming is performed;
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 22 of 51 PageID #: 22
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 29)
`(emphasis added)
`
`•
`
` (v) practices and provides detecting a current location of the computing device in the
`
`
`
`geographical map;
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 79)
`(annotated)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`22
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 23 of 51 PageID #: 23
`
`•
`
`(vi) practices and provides determining according to the geographical map a
`
`navigational direction from the current location to the one of the objects being
`
`selected; and
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 144)
`(annotated)
`
`•
`
`(vii) practices and provides showing the navigational direction on the artistic map
`
`
`
`being displayed.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`23
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 24 of 51 PageID #: 24
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page 147)
`(annotated)
`
`31.
`
`Further on information and belief, Defendant directly uses the infringing Accused
`
`
`
`Instrumentalities at least because it assembled the combined infringing elements and makes
`
`them collectively available in the United States, including via its Internet domain web pages
`
`and/or software applications, as well as via its internal systems and interfaces. Further, and
`
`on information and belief, Defendant has directly infringed by using the infringing Accused
`
`Instrumentalities as part of its ongoing and regular testing and/or internal legal compliance
`
`activities. Such testing and/or legal compliance necessarily requires Defendant to make and
`
`use the Accused Instrumentalities in an infringing manner. Still further, Defendant is a
`
`direct infringer by virtue of its branding and marketing activities, which collectively
`
`comprise the sale and offering for sale of the infringing Accused Instrumentalities.
`
`32.
`
`As shown above, Defendant is making, using, and offering for sale the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`24
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 25 of 51 PageID #: 25
`
`33.
`
`Additionally, upon information and belief, Defendant owns, directs, and/or controls the
`
`infringing method operation of the Accused Instrumentalities.
`
`34.
`
`On information and belief, the infringement of the ’628 Patent by Defendant will now be
`
`willful through the filing and service of this Complaint. The ’628 Patent is not expected to
`
`expire before July 26, 2033.
`
`35.
`
`In addition or in the alternative, Defendant now has knowledge and continues these actions
`
`and it indirectly infringes by way of inducing direct infringement by others and/or
`
`contributing to the infringement by others of the ’628 Patent in the State of Texas, in this
`
`judicial district, and elsewhere in the United States, by, among other things, making, using,
`
`importing, offering for sale, and/or selling, without license or authority, infringing services
`
`for use in systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’628 Patent. This includes
`
`without limitation, one or more of the Accused Instrumentalities by making, using,
`
`importing offering for sale, and/or selling such services, Defendant injured Plaintiff and is
`
`thus liable to Plaintiff for infringement of the ’628 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`36.
`
`Now with knowledge of the ’628 Patent, Defendant induces infringement under Title 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b). Defendant will have performed actions that induced infringing acts that
`
`Defendant knew or should have known would induce actual infringements. See Manville
`
`Sales Corp. v. Paramount Sys., Inc., 917 F.2d 544, 553 (Fed.Cir.1990), quoted in DSU Med.
`
`Corp. v. JMS Co., 471 F.3d 1293, 1306 (Fed.Cir.2006) (en banc in relevant part). “[A]
`
`finding of inducement requires a threshold finding of direct infringement—either a finding
`
`of specific instances of direct infringement or a finding that the accused products necessarily
`
`infringe.” Ricoh, 550 F.3d at 1341 (citing ACCO Brands, Inc. v. ABA Locks Manufacturer
`
`Co., 501 F.3d 1307, 1313, (Fed. Cir. 2007).
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`25
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 26 of 51 PageID #: 26
`
`37.
`
`Plaintiff will rely on direct and/or circumstantial evidence to prove the intent element. See
`
`Fuji Photo Film Co. v. Jazz Photo Corp., 394 F.3d 1368, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“A patentee
`
`may prove intent through circumstantial evidence.”); Water Techs. Corp. v. Calco, Ltd., 850
`
`F.2d 660, 668 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (“While proof of intent is necessary, direct evidence is not
`
`required; rather, circumstantial evidence may suffice.”).
`
`38.
`
`Defendant has taken active steps to induce infringement, such as advertising an infringing
`
`use, which supports a finding of an intention for the accused product to be used in an
`
`infringing manner. See Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913,
`
`932, 125 S. Ct. 2764, 162 L. Ed. 2d 781 (2005) (explaining that the contributory
`
`infringement doctrine “was devised to identify instances in which it may be presumed from
`
`distribution of an article in commerce that the distributor intended the article to be used to
`
`infringe another’s patent, and so may justly be held liable for that infringement”).
`
`39.
`
`In addition, on information and belief, and based in part upon the clear infringement by the
`
`Accused Instrumentalities, Defendant has a practice of not performing a review of the patent
`
`rights of others first for clearance or to assess infringement thereof prior to launching
`
`products and services. As such, Defendant has been willfully blind to the patent rights of
`
`Plaintiff.
`
`40.
`
`The foregoing infringement on the part of Defendant has caused past and ongoing injury to
`
`Plaintiff. The specific dollar amount of damages adequate to compensate for the
`
`infringement shall be determined at trial but is in no event less than a reasonable royalty
`
`from the date of first infringement to the expiration of the ’628 Patent.
`
`41.
`
`Each of Defendant’s aforesaid activities have been without authority and/or license from
`
`Plaintiff.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 27 of 51 PageID #: 27
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`COUNT II
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,898,003
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs by reference.
`
`Defendant has been on actual notice of the ’003 Patent at least as early as the date it
`
`received service of the Original Complaint in this litigation.
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiff or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to
`
`collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’003
`
`patent, thus the damages period begins at least as early as six years prior to the date of
`
`service of the Original Complaint in this litigation.
`
`45.
`
`Defendant manufactures, sells, offers for sale, owns, directs, and/or controls the operation of
`
`the Accused Instrumentalities and generates substantial financial revenues and benefits
`
`therefrom.
`
`46.
`
`Defendant has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the claims of the ’003
`
`Patent. As exemplary, Claim 1 is infringed by making, using, importing, selling, and/or
`
`offering for sale the Accused Instrumentalities. Defendant directly makes and sells the
`
`infringing Accused Instrumentalities at least because it is solely responsible for putting the
`
`infringing systems into service by directing or controlling the systems as a whole and by
`
`obtaining the benefits therefrom. More specifically, and on information and belief and as
`
`represented in the videos and figures above and below, with respect to the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities, Defendant:
`
`•
`
`(i) practices and provides displaying the map in accordance with a location
`
`determined by the GPS receiver, wherein the map shows a route on which the GPS
`
`receiver is indicated moving along;
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`27
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 28 of 51 PageID #: 28
`
`•
`
`(ii) practices and provides superimposing images representing objects onto the map,
`
`wherein the objects resembles structures or settings along the route, the images are
`
`superimposed along the route to create a 3D impression around the location, wherein
`
`the structures or settings include one or more of landmarks, signs, significant
`
`buildings, and exit designs, a perspective of the structures or settings changes in
`
`accordance with a direction the GPS receiver is moving, the map is not changed
`
`relatively while the images being imposed change as the structures or settings change;
`
`and
`
`•
`
`(iii) practices and provides changing the images with different color effects in
`
`reference to an input from at least one source about conditions of the location at a
`
`time that the map is displayed on the GPS receiver, making the map resembling an
`
`electronically generated map with a certain level of realism in accordance with
`
`surrounding of the location of the GPS, wherein an icon of a vehicle in the map
`
`shows that headlights are on when the vehicle is supposed to turn on its headlights.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 29 of 51 PageID #: 29
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAf9uWFKLvo (runtime 1:20)
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2KDaS1Mc0k (runtime 2:27)
`
`
`
`
`
`See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2KDaS1Mc0k (runtime 2:30)
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`29
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00359 Document 1 Filed 08/02/23 Page 30 of 51 PageID #: 30
`
`
`See, https://www.serratoyota.com/how-to-change-the-screen-brightness/ (emphasis added)
`
`See, https://assets.sia.toyota.com/publications/en/omnav-s/OM0C033U/pdf/OM0C033U.pdf (page
`61)(emphasis add