Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 1 of 6
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`AUSTIN DIVISION
`
`
`
`SolutionInc Limited,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:19-CV-1181
`
`Patent Case
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company; Aruba
`Networks, Inc.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff SolutionInc Limited ("SolutionInc"), through its attorneys, complains of Hewlett
`
`Packard Enterprise Company and Aruba Networks, Inc. (collectively "HPE" or “Defendant”),
`
`and alleges the following:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff SolutionInc Limited is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of Canada that maintains its principal place of business at 5692 Bloomfield St, Halifax, NS
`
`B3K 1T2, Canada.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware that maintains its principle place of business at 3000
`
`Hanover St., Palo Alto, California, 94304.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Aruba Networks, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of Delaware that maintains its principal place of business at 3333 Scott Blvd., Santa Clara,
`
`California, 95054. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`AUSTIN DIVISION
`
`
`
`SolutionInc Limited,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:19-CV-1181
`
`Patent Case
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company; Aruba
`Networks, Inc.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff SolutionInc Limited ("SolutionInc"), through its attorneys, complains of Hewlett
`
`Packard Enterprise Company and Aruba Networks, Inc. (collectively "HPE" or “Defendant”),
`
`and alleges the following:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff SolutionInc Limited is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of Canada that maintains its principal place of business at 5692 Bloomfield St, Halifax, NS
`
`B3K 1T2, Canada.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware that maintains its principle place of business at 3000
`
`Hanover St., Palo Alto, California, 94304.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Aruba Networks, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of Delaware that maintains its principal place of business at 3333 Scott Blvd., Santa Clara,
`
`California, 95054. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 2 of 6
`
`4.
`
`HPE maintains an established place of business at 14231 Tandem Blvd, Austin,
`
`Texas 78728.
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`5.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`6.
`
`This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`7.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has engaged in
`
`systematic and continuous business activities in this District. As described below, Defendant has
`
`committed acts of patent infringement giving rise to this action within this District.
`
`VENUE
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because Defendant has
`
`committed acts of patent infringement in this District, and has an established place of business in
`
`this District. In addition, SolutionInc has suffered harm in this district.
`
`PATENT-IN-SUIT
`
`9.
`
`SolutionInc is the assignee of all right, title and interest in United States Patent
`
`No. 7,526,538 (the "'538 Patent"); (the "Patent-in-Suit"); including all rights to enforce and
`
`prosecute actions for infringement and to collect damages for all relevant times against infringers
`
`of the Patent-in-Suit. Accordingly, SolutionInc possesses the exclusive right and standing to
`
`prosecute the present action for infringement of the Patent-in-Suit by Defendant.
`
`The '538 Patent
`
`10.
`
`The '538 Patent is entitled "System using server to provide mobile computer
`
`accessing to a different network without reconfiguring the mobile computer," and issued
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 3 of 6
`
`4/28/2009. The application leading to the '538 Patent was filed on 7/8/2005. A true and correct
`
`copy of the '538 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference.
`
`11.
`
`The '538 Patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`COUNT 1: INFRINGEMENT OF THE '538 PATENT
`
`SolutionInc incorporates the above paragraphs herein by reference.
`
`Direct Infringement. Defendant has been and continues to directly infringe one
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`or more claims of the '538 Patent in at least this District by making, using, offering to sell, selling
`
`and/or importing, without limitation, at least HPE's Aruba Enterprise Network Solutions (among
`
`the "Exemplary HPE Products") that infringe at least exemplary claims 1 of the '538 Patent (the
`
`"Exemplary '538 Patent Claims") literally or by the doctrine of equivalents. On information and
`
`belief, numerous other devices that infringe the claims of the '538 Patent have been made, used,
`
`sold, imported, and offered for sale by Defendant and/or its customers.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant also has and continues to directly infringe, literally or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, the Exemplary '538 Patent Claims, by having its employees internally
`
`test and use these Exemplary Products.
`
`15.
`
`The service of this Complaint upon Defendant constitutes actual knowledge of
`
`infringement as alleged here.
`
`16.
`
`Despite such actual knowledge, Defendant continues to make, use, test, sell, offer
`
`for sale, market, and/or import into the United States, products that infringe the '538 Patent. On
`
`information and belief, Defendant has also continued to sell the Exemplary HPE Products and
`
`distribute product literature and website materials inducing end users and others to use its
`
`products in the customary and intended manner that infringes the '538 Patent. Thus, on
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 4 of 6
`
`information and belief, Defendant is contributing to and/or inducing the infringement of the '538
`
`Patent.
`
`17.
`
`Induced Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally has
`
`been and continues to induce infringement of the '538 Patent, literally or by the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by selling Exemplary HPE Products to their customers for use in end-user products
`
`in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the '538 Patent.
`
`18.
`
`Contributory Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally
`
`has been and continues materially contribute to their own customers' infringement of the '538
`
`Patent, literally or by the doctrine of equivalents, by selling Exemplary HPE Products to their
`
`customers for use in end-user products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the '538
`
`Patent. Moreover, the Exemplary HPE Products are not a staple article of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial noninfringing use.
`
`19.
`
`Exhibit 2 includes charts comparing the Exemplary '538 Patent Claims to the
`
`Exemplary HPE Products. As set forth in these charts, the Exemplary HPE Products practice the
`
`technology claimed by the '538 Patent. Accordingly, the Exemplary HPE Products incorporated
`
`in these charts satisfy all elements of the Exemplary '538 Patent Claims.
`
`20.
`
`SolutionInc therefore incorporates by reference in its allegations herein the claim
`
`charts of Exhibit 2.
`
`21.
`
`SolutionInc is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for
`
`Defendant's infringement.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`22.
`
`Under Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, SolutionInc
`
`respectfully requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 5 of 6
`
`WHEREFORE, SolutionInc respectfully requests the following relief:
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`A judgment that the '538 Patent is valid and enforceable;
`
`A judgment that Defendant has infringed, contributorily infringed, and/or induced
`
`infringement of one or more claims of the '538 Patent;
`
`An accounting of all damages not presented at trial;
`
`A judgment that awards SolutionInc all appropriate damages under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`284 for Defendant's past infringement, and any continuing or future infringement
`
`of the Patent-in-Suit, up until the date such judgment is entered, including pre- or
`
`post-judgment interest, costs, and disbursements as justified under 35 U.S.C. § 284
`
`and, if necessary, to adequately compensate SolutionInc for Defendant's
`
`infringement, an accounting:
`
`i.
`
`that this case be declared exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285
`
`and that SolutionInc be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees against
`
`Defendant that it incurs in prosecuting this action;
`
`ii.
`
`that SolutionInc be awarded costs, and expenses that it incurs in prosecuting
`
`this action; and
`
`iii.
`
`that SolutionInc be awarded such further relief at law or in equity as the Court
`
`deems just and proper.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: December 3, 2019
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Isaac Rabicoff
`Rabicoff Law LLC
`73 W Monroe St
`Chicago, IL 60603
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cv-01181 Document 1 Filed 12/03/19 Page 6 of 6
`
`(773) 669-4590
`isaac@rabilaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`SolutionInc Limited
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
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
