Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 1 of 24
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`6:20-cv-899
`C.A. No. _____________
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)))))))))))))))
`
`TC TECHNOLOGY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`T-MOBILE USA, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff TC Technology LLC (“TC Technology”), by and through its attorneys, and for its
`
`Complaint against Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`TC Technology brings this action against T-Mobile for infringement of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,815,488.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`TC Technology is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws
`
`of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business located at 12405 Powerscourt Drive,
`
`St. Louis, Missouri 63131.
`
`3.
`
`T-Mobile is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
`
`Delaware with a principal place of business located at 12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, Washington
`
`98006. T-Mobile may be served through its registered agent Corporation Service Company, with
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`6:20-cv-899
`C.A. No. _____________
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)))))))))))))))
`
`TC TECHNOLOGY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`T-MOBILE USA, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff TC Technology LLC (“TC Technology”), by and through its attorneys, and for its
`
`Complaint against Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`TC Technology brings this action against T-Mobile for infringement of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,815,488.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`TC Technology is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws
`
`of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business located at 12405 Powerscourt Drive,
`
`St. Louis, Missouri 63131.
`
`3.
`
`T-Mobile is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
`
`Delaware with a principal place of business located at 12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, Washington
`
`98006. T-Mobile may be served through its registered agent Corporation Service Company, with
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 2 of 24
`
`a business address of 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701. On information and belief,
`
`T-Mobile is registered to do business in the State of Texas and has been since at least November
`
`22, 1999.
`
`THE LTE STANDARD
`
`4.
`
`Long Term Evolution (“LTE”) is a standard for wireless broadband communication
`
`for mobile devices and data terminals developed by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project
`
`(“3GPP”). Any LTE digital cellular standards as defined by the 3GPP (including the frequency
`
`division duplex (FDD) and time division duplex (TDD) variants) and all evolutions and subsequent
`
`versions of those standards are referred to in this Complaint as the “LTE Standard.”
`
`5.
`
`3GPP is a standard setting organization that creates technical specifications, which
`
`companies can adopt to ensure that their products are compatible with others’ products in the
`
`telecommunications industry.
`
`6.
`
`LTE is an evolution of the Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service
`
`(UMTS), which is a third-generation (3G) mobile cellular standard also set by the 3GPP.
`
`Compared to 3G, LTE delivers mobile communications network at a higher capacity and higher
`
`speed.
`
`7.
`
`LTE was first released in December 2008 as part of 3GPP Release 8, and has
`
`continued to evolve to provide more features and improvements. For instance, in March 2011,
`
`LTE-Advanced was introduced in Release 10, allowing 1 Gbps download and 500 Mbps uplink
`
`throughput; and in March 2016, LTE-Advanced Pro was introduced in Release 13, providing
`
`further performance improvements with enhancements to technologies such as carrier aggregation
`
`and MIMO (Multiple Input Multiple Output).
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 3 of 24
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 5,815,488
`
`8.
`
`TC Technology owns by assignment the right, title and interest in United States
`
`Patent No. 5,815,488 (“the ’488 patent”), titled “Multiple User Access Method Using OFDM,”
`
`which issued on September 29, 1998, naming Thomas H. Williams and Richard S. Prodan as co-
`
`inventors. A true and correct copy of the ’488 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit 1.
`
`9.
`
`The ’488 patent relates to fundamental innovation in LTE communication that
`
`permits multiple users of mobile devices to simultaneously access an RF channel with a high
`
`degree of immunity to channel impairments.
`
`ACCUSED SERVICES
`
`10.
`
`Upon information and belief, T-Mobile used, sold, and offered to sell
`
`communication services with LTE capabilities (the “Accused Services”), including but not limited
`
`to cellular data services, cellular voice services, and texting services compliant with the LTE
`
`Standard, in the Western District of Texas and throughout the United States.
`
`11.
`
`T-Mobile owns and operates an LTE network in the Western District of Texas and
`
`elsewhere in the United States. T-Mobile advertised its LTE network’s breadth of coverage on its
`
`website, including its 4G LTE coverage in seventeen different cities in the State of Texas,
`
`including those in the Western District of Texas.1 T-Mobile also advertised itself as having “the
`
`fastest nationwide 4G LTE speeds.”2
`
`
`
`1 See, e.g., https://web.archive.org/web/20140717165808/http://t-mobile-coverage.t-
`mobile.com/4gcitylist.aspx. An archived copy of this website is attached to this Complaint as
`Exhibit 2.
`
`2 See, e.g., https://web.archive.org/web/20141216110541/http://explore.t-mobile.com/4g-lte-
`network#datastrong. An archived copy of this website is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit
`3.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 4 of 24
`
`12.
`
`T-Mobile provided services for use on its LTE network. T-Mobile offered to sell
`
`and sold a variety of voice, text, and data products and services for use with the T-Mobile LTE
`
`network. For example, T-Mobile offered to sell and sold an array of plans all offering one gigabyte
`
`or more of 4G LTE data on T-Mobile’s 4G LTE network.3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3 See, e.g., https://web.archive.org/web/20141202030322/http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-
`plans/individual.html.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 5 of 24
`
`13.
`
`T-Mobile made its voice, data, and text services available to its customers, who
`
`used the services at the direction or control of T-Mobile. T-Mobile conducted business operations
`
`within the Western District of Texas in several stores and facilities throughout the District.4
`
`14.
`
`On information and belief, T-Mobile employees and contractors test T-Mobile’s
`
`voice, data, and text services.
`
`15.
`
`Customers were required to agree to T-Mobile’s Terms and Conditions before
`
`accessing T-Mobile’s LTE network. T-Mobile provided a copy of its Terms and Conditions on its
`
`website.5
`
`
`
`16.
`
`The use of these services that T-Mobile provided to its customers and employees
`
`on T-Mobile’s LTE network resulted in infringement of the ’488 patent.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`17.
`
`TC Technology realleges, adopts, and incorporates by reference the allegations
`
`contained in paragraphs 1-16 above as if fully set forth in this paragraph.
`
`
`
`4 See, e.g., https://www.yelp.com/biz/t-mobile-austin-13; https://www.yelp.com/biz/t-mobile-
`austin-7; https://www.yelp.com/biz/t-mobile-waco-2. Copies of these websites are attached to
`this Complaint as Exhibits 4, 5, and 6.
`
`5 https://www.t-mobile.com/responsibility/legal/terms-and-conditions-nov-2014
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 6 of 24
`
`18.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`19.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the matters asserted in this
`
`Complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 et seq.
`
`20.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over T-Mobile, because T-Mobile conducts
`
`continuous and systematic business in this District, including by its use, sale, and offer of the
`
`Accused Services to the residents of the Western District of Texas that T-Mobile knew would be
`
`used within this District, and by soliciting business from the residents of the Western District of
`
`Texas. For example, T-Mobile is subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court, because T-Mobile
`
`has regular and established places of business at its stores in the Western District of Texas, and
`
`elsewhere in the State of Texas, and directly and through agents regularly conducts, solicits, and
`
`transacts business in the Western District of Texas and elsewhere in the State of Texas.6
`
`21.
`
`In particular, T-Mobile has committed acts of infringement in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271, and has used, sold, and offered to sell the Accused Services in the State of Texas,
`
`including in this District, and engaged in infringing conduct within and directed at or from this
`
`District. For example, T-Mobile has purposefully and voluntarily placed the Accused Services
`
`into the stream of commerce with the expectation that those Accused Services would be used in
`this District.
`
`
`
`6 https://www.t-mobile.com/store-locator?sortBy=type2&page=1&search=austin,%20TX;
`https://www.t-mobile.com/store-
`locator?sortBy=type2&page=1&search=Waco,%20TX,%20USA. Copies of these websites are
`attached to this Complaint as Exhibits 7 and 8.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 7 of 24
`
`22.
`
`In particular, T-Mobile conducts a significant amount of business in the State of
`
`Texas based on its LTE network. For example, coverage maps available on T-Mobile’s website
`
`show that its services are available on its 4G LTE network throughout the State of Texas.7
`
`23.
`
`T-Mobile also advertises the speed and performance of its LTE network in multiple
`
`cities within the Western District of Texas.8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7 https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/coverage-
`map?icid=WMM_TM_U_19NETWORK_8NJ75N1T1380WNW518566
`
`8 https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/network-performance-data
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 8 of 24
`
`24.
`
`T-Mobile also conducts a significant amount of business throughout the Western
`
`District of Texas through its offers to sell, sales, and leases of consumer devices for use with its
`
`
`
`services.
`
`25.
`
`As described in paragraphs 10-16, T-Mobile provided services to its employees and
`
`customers for use on T-Mobile’s LTE network in the State of Texas and elsewhere in the United
`
`States.
`
`26.
`
`The Accused Services have been made available in, distributed to, and used in this
`
`District. T-Mobile’s infringing acts caused injury to TC Technology, including within this
`
`District.
`
`27.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and
`
`1400(b) at least because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims
`
`occurred in this District, and because T-Mobile has committed acts of infringement in this District
`
`and has a regular and established place of business in this District. In particular, T-Mobile has
`
`regular and established places of business at its stores in this District (see paragraphs 13 and 20
`
`above, which are incorporated by reference in this paragraph). On information and belief, T-
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 9 of 24
`
`Mobile employs engineers, salespeople, and/or other personnel within this District, including
`
`personnel familiar with the operation and distribution of the Accused Services.9
`
`COUNT 1: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,815,488
`
`28.
`
`TC Technology realleges, adopts, and incorporates by reference the allegations
`
`contained in paragraphs 1-27 above as if fully set forth in this paragraph.
`
`29.
`
`As the owner of the ’488 patent, TC Technology is authorized and has standing to
`
`bring legal action to enforce all rights arising under the ’488 patent.
`
`30.
`
`On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), T-Mobile infringed,
`
`literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 patent through its use,
`
`sale, and offer for sale of the Accused Services.
`
`31.
`
`T-Mobile either performed, or directed or controlled third parties’ performance of,
`
`each limitation of claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 patent when any of the Accused Services were used
`
`on the T-Mobile LTE network.
`
`32.
`
`T-Mobile conditioned participation in T-Mobile’s LTE network upon performance
`
`of the limitations of claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 patent and established the manner and/or timing of
`
`that performance.
`
`33.
`
`On information and belief, the Accused Services, when used on the T-Mobile LTE
`
`network, satisfied all claim limitations of claim 1 of the ’488 patent for at least the following
`
`reasons.
`
`
`
`9 https://www.t-mobile.com/store-locator?sortBy=type2&page=1&search=austin,%20TX;
`https://www.t-mobile.com/store-
`locator?sortBy=type2&page=1&search=Waco,%20TX,%20USA
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 10 of 24
`
`34.
`
`The Accused Services enabled a plurality of remote locations to transmit data to a
`
`central location.
`
`35.
`
`T-Mobile provided LTE coverage that allowed mobile device users to transmit data
`
`to a T-Mobile LTE network:10
`
`
`
`36.
`
`The T-Mobile LTE network included LTE base stations, cell sites, and other
`
`
`
`network infrastructure equipment:11
`
`
`
`10 https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/coverage-map
`
`11 https://howmobileworks.com/; https://howmobileworks.com/wp-
`content/uploads/2018/01/tech_choices_2017_v2.pdf; https://howmobileworks.com/faqs-
`resources/
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 11 of 24
`
`Full Data
`& Voice Path
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Weconstantly add capacity, coverage and speed
`to our network:
`
`(usually fiber optic cable) back to legacy telephone system.
`
`A traditional cell site includes an antenna structure with multiple
`antennas connected to low powered radio transmitters and receivers.
`Antennas are usually located 50’ to 150’ above ground level.
`
`Basestations house radio transceivers and amplifiers that provide
`linkage to the site's antennas and to the high-speed connections
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 12 of 24
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 12 of 24
`
`Property Availability
`
`property, local or regional park land, fire or police stations, church
`property or on anindividual landowner’s personal property.
`
`Standard support structuresare optimalfor
`meeting customer demand.
`
`raphic reach.
`
`In addition to all the science that goes into properly locating a cel
`site, T-Mobile must also find a property owner that is willing to have
`an antenna facility placed on his/her property.
`
`Public and private landlords are compensaied for the lease of space
`where antenna facilities are located — whether on commercial
`
`
`
`A standard wireless facility with antennas mounted on a monopole or other type of tower, is most often the
`best technology choice based on network design and radio frequency science. These sites typically range
`from 50' to 150" high and signals can travel up to several miles - depending on geography and topography.
`
`Versatility for coverage and capacity.
`
`To meet massive customer demand forreliable coverage, T-Mobile® is constantly expanding and upgrading
`its network technologies and
`
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 13 of 24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`37.
`
`At each remote location, the Accused Services coded data to be transmitted by
`
`translating each group of one or more bits of said data into a transform coefficient.
`
`38.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that a compliant customer wireless device produces
`
`complex-valued modulation symbols.
`
`39.
`
`For example, 3GPP TS 36.211 V10.4.0 (2011-12) Technical Specification
`
`(hereinafter, “TS 36.211”) at section 7.1 discloses producing “complex-valued modulation
`
`symbols”:
`
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 14 of 24
`
`
`In the Accused Services, the transform coefficient was associated with a particular
`
`40.
`
`baseband frequency in a particular subset of orthogonal baseband frequencies allocated to the
`
`remote location.
`
`41.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that each of the complex-valued modulation symbols
`
`is assigned to a particular subcarrier frequency.
`
`42.
`
`For example, 3GPP TS 36.300 V11.1.0 (2012-03) Technical Specification
`
`(hereinafter, “TS 36.300”) at section 5.2 describes an Uplink Transmission Scheme:
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 15 of 24
`
`43.
`
`Further, the LTE Standard describes that the particular subcarrier frequency is from
`
`a subset of frequencies.
`
`44.
`
`For example, 3GPP TS 36.521-1 V10.1.0 (2012-03) Technical Specification
`
`(hereinafter, “TS 36.521-1”) at Figure 5.4.2-1 describes a channel bandwidth arrangement:
`
`
`
`
`The particular subset of orthogonal baseband frequencies allocated to each remote
`
`45.
`
`location is chosen from a set of orthogonal baseband frequencies, the subsets of baseband
`
`frequencies allocated to each remote location being mutually exclusive.
`
`46.
`
`For example, TS 36.300 at section 5.2 describes an Uplink Transmission Scheme:
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 16 of 24
`
`47.
`
`Further, TS 36.211 at section 5.3.4 describes mapping to physical resources:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 17 of 24
`
`48.
`
`The Accused Services used, at each remote location, an electronic processor,
`
`performing an inverse orthogonal transformation on the transform coefficients to obtain a block of
`
`time domain data.
`
`49.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that an inverse FFT (“IFFT”) is applied to the
`
`complex-valued modulation symbols at each consumer wireless device to obtain time domain data.
`
`50.
`
`For example, TS 36.300 at section 5.2 describes an Uplink Transmission Scheme:
`
`
`The Accused Services utilized, at each remote location, a modulator to modulate
`
`51.
`
`the block of time domain data onto a carrier signal for transmission to the central location.
`
`52.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that each consumer wireless device uses a modulator
`
`to modulate the time domain data onto a carrier signal for transmission to the LTE network.
`
`53.
`
`For example, TS 36.211 at section 5.8 describes the use of a modulator:
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 18 of 24
`
`
`
`
`In the Accused Services, the carrier signal had the same carrier frequency for each
`
`54.
`
`remote location.
`
`55.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that the carrier signal used for transmission to the LTE
`
`network is a common carrier for each wireless consumer device.
`
`56.
`
`For example, TS 36.521-1 at section 5.4.4 describes determining the carrier
`
`frequency for each wireless consumer device:
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 19 of 24
`
`57.
`
`The Accused Services employed receiving at the central location from one or more
`
`of the remote locations, one or more blocks of time domain data modulated on one or more of the
`
`carrier signals.
`
`58.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that a given LTE base station receives modulated data
`
`from one or more consumer wireless devices via carrier signals.
`
`59.
`
`For example, TS 36.211 at section 5.8 describes the use of a modulator by a mobile
`
`device for transmission of modulated data to a base station:
`
`
`
`
`The Accused Services used a demodulator, which demodulated one or more blocks
`
`60.
`
`of time domain data from the carrier frequency signal.
`
`61.
`
`The LTE Standard describes using a demodulator to demodulate time domain data
`
`from a carrier.
`
`62.
`
`The Accused Services performed
`
`the orthogonal
`
`transformation on
`
`the
`
`demodulated time domain data to reconstruct the transform coefficients.
`
`
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 20 of 24
`
`63.
`
`The LTE Standard describes performing a FFT to reverse the IFFT described above
`
`and construct the complex-valued demodulation symbols.
`
`64.
`
`For example, 3GPP TS 36.101 V10.5.0 (2011-12) Technical Specification
`
`(hereinafter, “TS 36.101”) at section F.1 describes that the LTE network uses FFT:
`
`
`The Accused Services translated the transform coefficients into the data to be
`
`65.
`
`translated from each remote location.
`
`66.
`
`The LTE Standard describes that the LTE network performs the reverse of the
`
`process used to produce the complex-valued modulation symbols.
`
`67.
`
`Thus, the LTE Standard describes that the complex-valued modulation symbols are
`
`translated into the original data.
`
`68.
`
`As described in paragraphs 33-67 above, each limitation of claim 1 of the ’488
`
`patent was performed by T-Mobile or otherwise attributable to T-Mobile when any of the Accused
`
`Services were used on the T-Mobile LTE network.
`
`69.
`
`On information and belief, the Accused Services, when used on the T-Mobile LTE
`
`network, satisfied all claim limitations of claim 2 of the ’488 patent for at least the following
`
`reasons.
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 21 of 24
`
`70.
`
`The Accused Services enabled a plurality of remote locations to transmit data to a
`
`central location, as described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`71.
`
`At each remote location, the Accused Services coded data to be transmitted by
`
`translating each group of one or more bits of the data into a transform coefficient, as described
`
`with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`72.
`
`In the Accused Services, the transform coefficient was associated with a particular
`
`baseband frequency in a particular subset of orthogonal baseband frequencies allocated to the
`
`remote location, as described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`73.
`
`The particular subset of orthogonal baseband frequencies allocated to each remote
`
`location was chosen from a set of orthogonal baseband frequencies, the subsets of baseband
`
`frequencies allocated to each remote location being mutually exclusive, as described with respect
`
`to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`74.
`
`The Accused Services used, at each remote location, an electronic processor,
`
`performing an inverse orthogonal transformation on the transform coefficients to obtain a block of
`
`time domain data, as described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`75.
`
`The Accused Services utilized, at each remote location, a modulator to modulate
`
`the block of time domain data onto a carrier signal for transmission to the central location, as
`
`described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`76.
`
`In the Accused Services, the carrier signal had the same carrier frequency for each
`
`remote location, as described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`77.
`
`The Accused Services employed receiving at the central location from one or more
`
`of the remote locations, one or more blocks of time domain data modulated on one or more of the
`
`carrier signals, as described with respect to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 22 of 24
`
`78.
`
`The Accused Services used a demodulator, multiplying the received one or more
`
`blocks of time domain data with in-phase and quadrature carrier signals to obtain in-phase and
`
`quadrature baseband signals, converting the in-phase and quadrature baseband signals to digital
`
`form, and using an electronic processor, performing the orthogonal transform using the in-phase
`
`and quadrature baseband signals as real and imaginary values, respectively, to demodulate the one
`
`or more blocks of time domain data from the carrier frequency signal.
`
`79.
`
`The LTE Standard describes modulating a signal using in-phase and quadrature
`
`components of the signal.
`
`80.
`
`For example, TS 36.211 at section 5.8 describes processing a signal based on its
`
`real (“Re”) and imaginary (“Im”) components:
`
`
`
`
`Further, the LTE Standard describes using a demodulator to perform the reverse of
`
`81.
`
`the modulation described above.
`
`
`
`- 22 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 23 of 24
`
`82.
`
`The Accused Services performed
`
`the orthogonal
`
`transformation on
`
`the
`
`demodulated time domain data to reconstruct the transform coefficients, as described with respect
`
`to claim 1 of the ’488 patent above.
`
`83.
`
`As described in paragraphs 69-82 above, each limitation of claim 2 of the ’488
`
`patent was performed by T-Mobile or otherwise attributable to T-Mobile when any of the Accused
`
`Services were used on the T-Mobile LTE network.
`
`84.
`
`TC Technology is entitled to recover from T-Mobile all damages that TC
`
`Technology has sustained as a result of T-Mobile’s infringement of the ’488 patent, including
`
`without limitation lost profits and no less than a reasonable royalty.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`85.
`
`Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, TC Technology
`
`respectfully demands a trial by jury on all issues triable by jury.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, TC Technology respectfully requests that judgment be entered in favor of
`
`TC Technology and against T-Mobile as follows:
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Judgment that T-Mobile has infringed the ’488 patent;
`
`Damages sufficient to compensate TC Technology for T-Mobile’s infringement
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Costs and expenses incurred in this action;
`
`Prejudgment and post-judgment interest;
`
`Attorneys’ fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`Such other and further relief as this Court may deem proper and just under the
`
`circumstances.
`
`
`
`
`- 23 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00899-ADA Document 1 Filed 09/30/20 Page 24 of 24
`
`Date: September 30, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By /s/ B. Russell Horton
`B. Russell Horton
`rhorton@gbkh.com
`George Brothers Kincaid & Horton LLP
`114 West 7th Street, Suite 1100
`Austin, TX 78701
`Telephone: (512) 495-1400
`Facsimile: (512) 499-0094
`
`Attorney for Plaintiff TC Technology LLC
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Charles K. Verhoeven (pro hac vice application to be filed)
`charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com
`David Eiseman (pro hac vice application to be filed)
`davideiseman@quinnemanuel.com
`Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
`50 California Street, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: (415) 875-6600
`Facsimile: (415) 875-6700
`
`Deepa Acharya (pro hac vice application to be filed)
`deepaacharya@quinnemanuel.com
`Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
`1300 I Street NW, Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20005-4107
`Telephone: (202) 538-8000
`Facsimile: (202) 538-8100
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 24 -
`
`
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
