throbber
Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 1 of 32
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`MAXELL, LTD.,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00646
`COMPLAINT AND DEMAND
`FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Maxell, Ltd. (“Maxell”), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this
`
`complaint under 35 U.S.C. § 271 for Patent Infringement against Defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple”)
`
`and further alleges as follows, upon actual knowledge with respect to itself and its own acts, and
`
`upon information and belief as to all other matters.
`
`OVERVIEW
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement by Maxell. Founded in 1961 as Maxell
`
`Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., Maxell is a leading global manufacturer of information storage media
`
`products, including magnetic tapes, optical discs, and battery products such as lithium ion
`
`rechargeable micro batteries and alkaline dry batteries, and the company has over 50 years of
`
`experience producing industry-leading recordable media and energy products for both the
`
`consumer and the professional markets. Maxell is also a leading manufacturer of projectors and
`
`lenses and additionally sells various other devices, such as Bluetooth headsets, wireless charging
`
`solutions, etc.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 2 of 32
`
`2.
`
`Maxell has built up an international reputation for excellence and reliability, for
`
`pioneering the power supplies and digital recording for today’s mobile and multi-media devices,
`
`and leading the electronics industry in the fields of storage media and batteries.
`
`3.
`
`Since being one of the first companies to develop alkaline batteries and Blu Ray
`
`camcorder discs, Maxell has always assured its customers of industry leading product innovation
`
`and is one of the world’s foremost suppliers of memory, power, audio, and visual goods. Maxell’s
`
`well-recognized logo and iconic “blown away” image exemplify the reputation Maxell carefully
`
`developed in these markets.
`
`
`
`4.
`
`As more fully described below, in 2009 Hitachi, Ltd. assigned much of its consumer
`
`product-facing intellectual property to Hitachi Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd. Then, in 2013,
`
`Hitachi Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd. assigned the intellectual property, including the patents in
`
`this case, to Hitachi Maxell, Ltd., which later assigned the patents to Maxell as a result of a
`
`reorganization and name change. This reorganization was an effort to align its intellectual property
`
`with the licensing, business development, and research and development efforts of Maxell,
`
`including in the mobile and mobile-media device market (Hitachi, Ltd. and Hitachi Consumer
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd. are referred to herein collectively as “Hitachi”). Maxell continues to sell
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 3 of 32
`
`products in the mobile device market including wireless charging solutions, wireless flash drives,
`
`multimedia players, storage devices, and headphones. Maxell also maintains intellectual property
`
`related to televisions, computer products, tablets, digital cameras, and mobile phones. As a mobile
`
`technology developer and industry leader, and due to its historical and continuous investment in
`
`research and development, including in the state of Texas, Maxell owns a portfolio of patents
`
`related to such technologies and actively enforces its patents through licensing and/or litigation.
`
`Maxell is forced to bring this action against Apple as a result of Apple’s knowing and ongoing
`
`infringement of Maxell’s patents as further described herein.
`
`5.
`
`Since at least June 2013, Apple has been aware of Maxell’s patents and has had
`
`numerous meetings and interactions regarding its infringement of these patents. These meetings
`
`included Apple’s representatives being provided with detailed information regarding Maxell’s
`
`patents, the developed technology, and Apple’s ongoing use of this patented technology. Through
`
`this process, Apple’s representatives requested and received detailed explanations regarding
`
`Maxell’s patents and allegations. A resident of Marshall, Texas, Alan Loudermilk, was involved
`
`in these extensive licensing negotiations with Apple on Maxell’s behalf.
`
`6.
`
`Maxell believed that the parties could reach a mutually beneficial solution and to
`
`that end considered a potential business transaction and continued to answer multiple inquiries
`
`from Apple over the course of several years. Apple elected, however, not to enter into an agreement
`
`and did not license Maxell’s patents. Accordingly, in 2019, Apple brought litigation against Apple
`
`asserting infringement of ten other patents from the same portfolio of which the currently asserted
`
`patents are a part. Case No. 5:19-cv-00036-RWS (E.D. Tex.). Yet, Apple has still elected not to
`
`license Maxell’s patents and that litigation is pending. The result is that Apple has continued, and
`
`continues today, to make, use, sell and offer for sale Maxell’s patented technology without license.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 4 of 32
`
`7.
`
`Since 2014, Maxell has had regular and continuous business in Texas. As a result
`
`of such business dealings and hopes to expand those and other business dealings, a Maxell affiliate,
`
`Maxell Research and Development America, LLC (“MRDA”), was founded in Marshall, Texas.
`
`MRDA is part of a joint venture with another business in Marshall, and the entities work together
`
`on research and development related to IoT, mobile, media and battery technologies. MRDA’s
`
`ongoing projects include, for example, the research and development of lensless camera
`
`technology, which Maxell hopes will be utilized for sensor and camera technology in smartphones.
`
`Maxell engineers and executives regularly travel to Marshall to meet and work to expand the
`
`research and development activities, business, and investments being made by Maxell, MRDA,
`
`and their business partners in Texas to further the goals of these companies.
`
`8.
`
`In addition to the 2019 litigation filed against Apple, noted above, Maxell has filed
`
`five other lawsuits in the Eastern District of Texas in order to enforce the patent portfolio of which
`
`the currently asserted patents are a part. Two of the patents accused of infringement herein,
`
`including U.S. Patent Nos. 8,982,086 and 7,203,517 were previously asserted in the Eastern
`
`District of Texas against Huawei Device Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA, Inc., ZTE (USA), Inc.,
`
`ZTE Corporation, and/or ASUSTeK Computer Inc. One case, involving other patents from
`
`Maxell’s portfolio but not any of the asserted patents, Maxell Ltd. v. ZTE (USA) Inc., Case No.
`
`5:16-cv-00179-RWS, culminated in a ten day jury trial. At this point, all of Maxell’s cases, except
`
`that against Apple, have been resolved and dismissed.
`
`PARTIES
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff Maxell, Ltd. is a Japanese corporation with a registered place of business
`
`at 1 Koizumi, Oyamazaki, Oyamazaki-cho, Otokuni-gun, Kyoto, Japan.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 5 of 32
`
`10.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Apple Inc. is a California corporation having
`
`a principal place of business located at One Apple Park Way Cupertino, California 95014 and
`
`regular and established places of business at 12545 Riata Vista Cir, Austin, Texas and 5501 W.
`
`Parmer Lane, Austin, Texas, as well as other locations in Texas (e.g., 2901 S. Capital of Texas
`
`Hwy, Austin, Texas and 3121 Palm Way, Austin, Texas). Apple offers and sells its products and/or
`
`services, including those accused herein of infringement, to customers and potential customers
`
`located in Texas, including in the judicial Western District of Texas. Apple may be served with
`
`process through its registered agent for service in Texas: CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan
`
`Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE
`
`11. Maxell brings this action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United
`
`States, 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq.
`
`12.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because the action arises under the patent laws of the
`
`United States.
`
`13.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Apple. Apple conducts business and has
`
`committed acts of direct and indirect patent infringement in this District, the State of Texas, and
`
`elsewhere in the United States. Moreover, Apple is registered to do business in the State of Texas,
`
`has offices and facilities in the State of Texas and this District, and actively directs its activities to
`
`customers located in the State of Texas and this District.
`
`14.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Apple has regular
`
`and established places of business in this District, including at 12545 Riata Vista Cir, Austin, Texas
`
`and 5501 W. Parmer Lane, Austin, Texas, as well as Apple Stores located at, at least, 2901 S.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 6 of 32
`
`Capital of Texas Hwy, Austin, Texas and 3121 Palm Way, Austin, Texas. Thus, Apple is deemed
`
`to reside in this District, has committed acts of infringement described herein in this District, and
`
`has purposely transacted business involving the accused devices in this District. Further, there is
`
`significant local interest in view of Apple being one of the largest private employers in this District
`
`and Apple has received a significant amount of tax subsidies in this District.
`
`15.
`
`Given Mr. Loudermilk’s role in prior licensing negotiations between Maxell and
`
`Apple, MRDA’s presence in Marshall, Apple’s operations in Texas, and the prior litigation
`
`concerning Maxell’s patent portfolio, Maxell believed the Eastern District of Texas to be the
`
`proper, and most convenient, venue for it to litigate its patent claims against Apple. Accordingly,
`
`in 2019, Maxell filed its first suit against Apple in that district. Since such case was filed, however,
`
`Apple closed its store in the Eastern District of Texas. Apple continues, however, to have regular
`
`and established places of business in the Western District of Texas, as set forth above. In view of
`
`the proximity of the Western District to Marshall, it is now the proper, most convenient, venue for
`
`Maxell to litigate its patent claims against Apple.
`
`COUNT 1 - INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,203,517
`
`16. Maxell incorporates paragraphs 1-15 above by reference.
`
`17.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,203,517 (the “’517 Patent,” attached hereto at Exhibit 1) duly
`
`issued on April 10, 2007 and is entitled Mobile Communication Terminal Device.
`
`18. Maxell is the owner by assignment of the ’517 Patent and possesses all rights under
`
`the ’517 Patent, including the exclusive right to recover for past and future infringement.
`
`19.
`
`At the time of the ’517 Patent, there were some mobile devices that included
`
`multiple communication interfaces for purposes of communicating with, for example, external
`
`devices. The mobile devices would switch between the communication interfaces to provide
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 7 of 32
`
`various services (e.g., cellular or WiFi). But conventional methods for switching among the
`
`communication interfaces were based on availability and favorability of a particular
`
`communication interface. Further, the use of such communication interfaces could be affected
`
`when the mobile devices were traveling at a high rate of speed (e.g., in a train or car). Because
`
`availability and favorability of communication interfaces is affected by movement of the mobile
`
`device, conventional methods caused communication instability by relying on just these factors
`
`when switching between communication interfaces.
`
`20.
`
`The ’517 Patent solved the problem of communication instability by selecting a
`
`suitable physical interface based on three factors: (1) communication interface availability; (2)
`
`device movement speed; and (3) position of the mobile device. The combination of these three
`
`factors ensures that switching between communication interfaces does not cause connection
`
`instability by only causing the switch when the conditions favor a better connection after the switch
`
`instead of causing unnecessary and frequent switching, For example, if the mobile device is
`
`moving at a high speed, the mobile device embodying the invention of the ’517 Patent may make
`
`a determination to not switch communication interfaces even if another communication interface
`
`becomes available because this interface may only be available for a short period of time due to
`
`the moving speed of the mobile device.
`
`21.
`
`Apple has directly infringed one or more claims of the ’517 Patent in this District
`
`and elsewhere in Texas, including at least claims 9-10 literally and/or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by or through making, using, importing, offering for sale and/or selling its
`
`telecommunications technology, including at least Apple products having wireless functionality
`
`running materially similar software to iOS 12/13/14, including, without limitation, the iPhone 7
`
`(A1660/A1778), iPhone 7 Plus (A1661/A1784), iPhone 8 (A1863/A1905), iPhone 8 Plus
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 8 of 32
`
`(A1864/A1897), iPhone XR (A1984), Apple iPhone XS (A1920), iPhone XS Max (A1921),
`
`iPhone 11 (A2111), iPhone 11 Pro (A2160), iPhone 11 Pro Max (A2161), iPhone SE
`
`(A1662/A1723/A2275/A2296), Apple Watch Series 5 (A2094/A2095), Apple Watch Series 3
`
`(A1860/A1861), iPad mini 5 (A2124/A2126), iPad Pro (11”) (A2013/A2068/A2230), iPad 7th
`
`generation (A2198/A2200), iPad 6th generation (A1954), iPad Pro (12.9”) (3rd /4th generation)
`
`(A2014/A1895/A2229/A2069/A2232), and iPad Air 3 (A2123/A2153) (collectively, “the ’517
`
`Accused Products”). Attached as Exhibit 6 is a representative claim chart for the ’517 Accused
`
`Products showing infringement of claims 9-10 of the ’517 Patent by exemplary ’517 Accused
`
`Products. Maxell reserves the right to discover and pursue any additional infringing devices that
`
`incorporate infringing functionalities. For the avoidance of doubt, the ’517 Accused Products are
`
`identified to describe Apple’s infringement and in no way limit the discovery and infringement
`
`allegations against Apple concerning other devices that incorporate the same or reasonably similar
`
`functionalities.
`
`22.
`
`Apple has indirectly infringed at least claims 9-10 of the ’517 Patent in this District
`
`and elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, actively inducing the use, offering for
`
`sale, selling, or importation of at least the ’517 Accused Products. Apple’s customers who purchase
`
`devices and components thereof and operate such devices and components in accordance with
`
`Apple’s instructions directly infringe one or more claims of the ’517 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271. Apple instructs its customers through at least user guides or websites, such as those
`
`located
`
`at:
`
`https://support.apple.com/en_US/manuals
`
`or
`
`https://support.apple.com/en-
`
`us/HT205296. For example, on its website, Apple instructs its customers to use “Wi-Fi Assist”
`
`and makes sure that “Wi-Fi Assist is on by default”:
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 9 of 32
`
`
`
`See https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205296. Exhibit 6 provides additional citations to, and
`
`excerpts from, exemplary relevant Apple web pages that demonstrate Apple’s specific intent for
`
`its customers to use the accused functionality in an infringing manner. Apple is thereby liable for
`
`infringement of the ’517 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`23.
`
`Apple has indirectly infringed at least claims 9-10 of the ’517 Patent, by, among
`
`other things, contributing to the direct infringement of others, including customers of the ’517
`
`Accused Products by making, offering to sell, or selling, in the United States, or importing a
`
`component of a patented machine, manufacture, or combination, or an apparatus for use in
`
`practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be
`
`especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the ’517 Patent, and not a staple
`
`article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`24.
`
`For example, the ’517 Accused Products include hardware (Wi-Fi chipset, cellular
`
`chipset, transceivers, A12 processor, antennas, and accelerometer) and software (Wi-Fi assist
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 10 of 32
`
`software, iOS software to switch between Wi-Fi and cellular connection, cellular modem software
`
`to determine mobility state). These are components of a patented machine, manufacture, or
`
`combination, or an apparatus for use in practicing a patented process. Furthermore, such
`
`components are a material part of the invention and upon information and belief are not a staple
`
`article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Thus, Apple is liable
`
`for infringement of the ’517 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`25.
`
`Apple has been on notice of the ’517 Patent since, at least, May 17, 2018 based on
`
`correspondence directed to Principal Counsel Heather Mewes at Apple. That correspondence set
`
`forth Maxell’s belief that Apple makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports products that infringe
`
`certain of Maxell’s patents, and specifically identified the ’517 Patent as well as exemplary
`
`asserted claims and exemplary accused products for that patent. By the time of trial, Apple will
`
`thus have known and intended (since receiving such notice), that its continued actions would
`
`actively induce and contribute to actual infringement of at least claims 9-10 of the ’517 Patent.
`
`26.
`
`Apple undertook and continued its infringing actions despite an objectively high
`
`likelihood that such activities infringed the ’517 Patent, which has been duly issued by the USPTO,
`
`and is presumed valid. For example, since, at least May 17, 2018, Apple has been aware of an
`
`objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted and continue to constitute infringement of
`
`the ’517 Patent, and that the ’517 Patent is valid. On information and belief, Apple could not
`
`reasonably, subjectively believe that its actions do not constitute infringement of the ’517 Patent,
`
`nor could it reasonably, subjectively believe that the patent is invalid. Despite that knowledge and
`
`subjective belief, and the objectively high likelihood that its actions constitute infringement, Apple
`
`has continued its infringing activities. As such, Apple willfully infringes the ’517 Patent.
`
`27. Maxell has been damaged by Apple’s infringement of the ’517 Patent.
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 11 of 32
`
`COUNT 2 - INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,982,086
`
`28. Maxell incorporates paragraphs 1-27 above by reference.
`
`29.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,982,086 (the “’086 Patent,” attached hereto at Exhibit 2) duly
`
`issued on March 17, 2015 and is entitled Information Processing Apparatus.
`
`30. Maxell is the owner by assignment of the ’086 Patent and possesses all rights under
`
`the ’086 Patent, including the exclusive right to recover for past and future infringement.
`
`31.
`
`The ’086 Patent discloses techniques for unlocking information processing devices,
`
`such as smartphones, with convenience. For example, prior to the ’086 Patent, one way of
`
`unlocking devices was by inputting a passcode that was preset by a user. This process would be
`
`time consuming and would require the user to memorize the passcode. Further, if the user has
`
`multiple devices he or she would need to memorize different passcodes or have the same passcode
`
`on all of the devices but increase the risk of the security breach of all the devices if another user
`
`learnt of the passcode.
`
`32.
`
`The ’086 Patent allowed users to conveniently execute an unlock operation on their
`
`devices by using the tip or pad of their fingers as shown below in Figure 11A of the ’086 Patent:
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 12 of 32
`
`33.
`
`Further, the ’086 patent also allows users to associate specific operations with their
`
`fingertip and finger pad such that when a user uses his or her fingertip the device recognizes that
`
`the user is entering an input via the fingertip and executes a corresponding operation. This is further
`
`shown in Figure 12B of the ’086 patent:
`
`
`
`34.
`
`Apple has directly infringed one or more claims of the ’086 Patent in this District
`
`and elsewhere in Texas, including at least claims 1-4 literally and/or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by or through making, using, importing, offering for sale and/or selling its
`
`telecommunications technology, including at least the iPhone 7 (A1660/A1778), iPhone 7 Plus
`
`(A1661/A1784), iPhone 8 (A1863/A1905), iPhone 8 Plus (A1864/A1897), iPhone SE
`
`(A1662/A1723/A2275/A2296), iPad mini 5 (A2133/A2124/A2126), iPad 6th generation
`
`(A1893/A1954), iPad 7th Generation (A2197/A2200), iPad Air 3 (A2152/A2123/A2153),
`
`MacBook Pro (16,3), MacBook Pro (16,2), MacBook Pro (16,1), MacBook Pro (15,4), MacBook
`
`Pro (15,1), MacBook Pro (15,2), MacBook Air (7,2), MacBook Air (8,1), MacBook Air (8,2), and
`
`MacBook Air (9,1) (collectively, “the ’086 Accused Products”). Attached as Exhibit 7 is a
`
`representative claim chart for the ’086 Accused Products showing infringement of claims 1-4 of
`
`the ’086 Patent by exemplary ’086 Accused Products. Maxell reserves the right to discover and
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 13 of 32
`
`pursue any additional infringing devices that incorporate infringing functionalities. For the
`
`avoidance of doubt, the ’086 Accused Products are identified to describe Apple’s infringement
`
`and in no way limit the discovery and infringement allegations against Apple concerning other
`
`devices that incorporate the same or reasonably similar functionalities
`
`35.
`
`Apple has indirectly infringed at least claims 1-4 of the ’086 Patent in this District
`
`and elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, actively inducing the use, offering for
`
`sale, selling, or importation of at least the ’086 Accused Products. Apple’s customers who purchase
`
`devices and components thereof and operate such devices and components in accordance with
`
`Apple’s instructions directly infringe one or more claims of the ’086 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271. Apple instructs its customers through at least user guides or websites, such as those
`
`located
`
`at:
`
`https://support.apple.com/en_US/manuals
`
`or
`
`https://support.apple.com/en-
`
`us/HT201371. For example, on its website, Apple instructs its customers to “Set up Touch ID”
`
`and “Use Touch ID”:
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 14 of 32
`Case 6:20-cv-00646—ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 14 of 32
`
`Set up Touch ID
`Beforeyoucan setup IoucnlD,youneedtocreatea passcode foryourdeyiceflnenfonowtnese steps:
`1. Make sure that the Home buttonand your fingerare cleanand dry.
`2. lap Settings > touch "33; Passcode.tnenen1eryuour basscode.
`3. lab Add a l- inger brim aid hold your deuiceas you normarya would '«nentouching the Home button.
`a. loucnt ne Home button witn your finger—b utdon‘t Dress. Hold it there untilyou feel a quick vibration.
`or until you're asked to lift your finger.
`
`
`
`.iw —uu—unun——
`firm
`
`Place Your Finger
`Lilt m: 'csl y-aurrigc- cum: Hnmc
`lulu" IWJII.
`
`
`
`
`
`Use Touch ID to unlock your iPhone or make purchases
`Mter will set up ltmrzlr ll), yml can use Innull II) In unlock your iPiIHIIH. Just press "In I IIIIIIP. bullun using
`the finger you registered with Touch ID.
`
`
`
`.
`
`Make purchases with Touch ID
`YIIII can use lunch ll) infill-.ad of your Apple II) password
`to make purchases in the iTunes Store. App Store,
`and Apple Books. Just follow these steps:
`‘I. Make sure iTunes 3. App Store is turned on under
`Settings ) luuclr II) It. Pasrvrzude. If you narr'l IIIIn il on,
`you might need to sign in with your Apple ID in Settings
`) i Illnes 8. App Store.
`2. Open the iTums Store, App Store. or Apple Books.
`3. Tap something to buy. You'll see a Touch ID prompt.
`4. To make a purchase, lightly touch the Home button.
`
`Use Touch ID [or Apple Pay
`with an iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus or later, you can use
`Touch ID to make Apple Pay purchases in stores, within
`
`apps, and on websites In Safan. You can also use Touch
`ID on your iPhone to complete website purchases from
`your Mac. If you have an iPad Pro, iPad Air 2 or iPad Mini 3
`
`i‘rm 51m:
`
`I mssrmosm‘rsall
`.
`tmzsesmuu
`
`mi
`
`$1439
`
`within apps and Mn websites in Safari.
`
`or later, you can use Touch ID to! Apple Pay purchases
`
`Par wilh Mum
`
`Net-NI help using] Intruh ll)?
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 15 of 32
`
`
`
`See https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201371; https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/touch-
`
`id-mchl16fbf90a/mac. Exhibit 7 provides additional citations to, and excerpts from, exemplary
`
`relevant Apple web pages that demonstrate Apple’s specific intent for its customers to use the
`
`accused functionality in an infringing manner. Apple is thereby liable for infringement of the ’086
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b)
`
`36.
`
`Apple has indirectly infringed at least claims 1-4 of the ’086 Patent, by, among
`
`other things, contributing to the direct infringement of others, including customers of the ’086
`
`Accused Products by making, offering to sell, or selling, in the United States, or importing a
`
`component of a patented machine, manufacture, or combination, or an apparatus for use in
`
`practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be
`
`especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the ’086 Patent, and not a staple
`
`article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`37.
`
`For example, the ’086 Accused Products include hardware (finger print sensor,
`
`application processor, and display) and software (Touch ID software). These are components of a
`
`patented machine, manufacture, or combination, or an apparatus for use in practicing a patented
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 16 of 32
`
`process. Furthermore, such components are a material part of the invention and upon information
`
`and belief are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing
`
`use. Thus, Apple is liable for infringement of the ’086 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(c)
`
`38.
`
`Apple has been on notice of the ’086 Patent since, at least, May 17, 2018 based on
`
`correspondence directed to Principal Counsel Heather Mewes at Apple. That correspondence set
`
`forth Maxell’s belief that Apple makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports products that infringe
`
`certain of Maxell’s patents, and specifically identified the ’086 Patent as well as exemplary
`
`asserted claims and exemplary accused products for that patent. By the time of trial, Apple will
`
`thus have known and intended (since receiving such notice), that its continued actions would
`
`actively induce and contribute to actual infringement of at least claims 1-4 of the ’086 Patent.
`
`39.
`
`Apple undertook and continued its infringing actions despite an objectively high
`
`likelihood that such activities infringed the ’086 Patent, which has been duly issued by the USPTO,
`
`and is presumed valid. For example, since, at least May 17, 2018, Apple has been aware of an
`
`objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted and continue to constitute infringement of
`
`the ’086 Patent, and that the ’086 Patent is valid. On information and belief, Apple could not
`
`reasonably, subjectively believe that its actions do not constitute infringement of the ’086 Patent,
`
`nor could it reasonably, subjectively believe that the patent is invalid. Despite that knowledge and
`
`subjective belief, and the objectively high likelihood that its actions constitute infringement, Apple
`
`has continued its infringing activities. As such, Apple willfully infringes the ’086 Patent.
`
`40. Maxell has been damaged by Apple’s infringement of the ’086 Patent.
`
`COUNT 3 - INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,199,821
`
`41. Maxell incorporates paragraphs 1-40 above by reference.
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 17 of 32
`
`42.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,199,821 (the “’821 Patent,” attached hereto at Exhibit 3) duly
`
`issued on April 3, 2007 and is entitled Imaging Apparatus and Method for Controlling White
`
`Balance.
`
`43. Maxell is the owner by assignment of the ’821 Patent and possesses all rights under
`
`the ’821 Patent, including the exclusive right to recover for past and future infringement.
`
`44.
`
`The ’821 patent is directed to an imaging apparatus that has the ability to capture
`
`pictures with the correct color effect. Specifically, in order for a camera to capture and generate a
`
`picture of high quality with proper color, the camera needs to balance the different portions of the
`
`image. For example, if the camera is photographing a subject that is wearing a white shirt and has
`
`a colorful background, the camera will need to process the image signals in such a way that the
`
`white portion of the image is balanced with the colorful portion. This processing is referred to as
`
`white balancing of an image or white balance correction.
`
`45.
`
`Conventional techniques prior to the ’821 patent performed white balance
`
`corrections by constructing a feedback loop such that signals corresponding to the white portion
`
`and colored portions are distinguished to detect a white balance deviation and this detected
`
`deviation is then used to adjust the signals corresponding to the colored portions. But this technique
`
`does not create pictures of high quality under all conditions as the detected deviation may not be
`
`accurate if the colored portions of the image include a large part of the picture. Further, this
`
`technique does not account for additional variations during photography including brightness of
`
`the object being photographed, distance of the object from the camera, and zoom value.
`
`46.
`
`The ’821 patent solves these problems by implementing white balance correction
`
`that takes into account the distance of the object being photographed, a zoom value, and brightness
`
`of the object being photographed. For example, the ’821 patent discloses an imaging apparatus
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00646-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/16/20 Page 18 of 32
`
`that includes an object distance detecting means, a zoom detecting means, and a brightness
`
`detecting means such that the apparatus corrects the white balance of the image signals based on
`
`the detected brightness, zoom, and distance values. Incorporating such a white balance correction
`
`technique ensures that the imaging apparatus generates high quality pictures despite varying
`
`conditions and control parameters.
`
`47.
`
`Apple has directly infringed one or more claims of the ’821 Patent in this District
`
`and elsewhere in Texas, including at least claims 1, 4, 6, and 7 literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, by or through making, using, importing, offering for sale and/or selling its
`
`telecommunications technology, including at least Apple products having functionality running
`
`materially similar software to iOS 12/13/14, including, without limitation, the Apple iPhone XS
`
`(A1920), iPhone XS Max (A1921), iPhone XR (A1984), iPhone 11 (A2111), iPhone 11 Pro
`
`(A2160), iPhone 11 Pro Max (A2161), iPhone SE (A1662/A1723/A2275/A2296), iPhone 8 Plus
`
`(A1864/A1897), iPhone 8 (A1863/ A1905), iPhone 7 Plus (A1661/A1784), iPhone 7
`
`(A1660/A1778), as well as the iPad mini (5th gen.) (A2133/A2124/A2126), iPad Pro (12.9”) (3rd /
`
`4th generation) (A1876/A2014/A2229/A2069/A2232), iPad Pro 11” (A1980/A2013/A2068/
`
`A2230), iPad (6th generation) (A1893/A1954), iPad (7th generation) (A2200/A2198), iPad Air (3rd
`
`gen.) (A2152/A2123/A2153), MacBook (10,1), MacBook Pro (15,1), MacBook products
`
`(MacBook (10,1), MacBook Pro (15,1), MacBook Pro (15,2), MacBook Pro (15,4), MacBook Pro
`
`(16,1), MacBook Pro (16,2), MacBook Pro (16

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket