Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 1 of 39
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`GENTEX CORPORATION and INDIGO
`TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`Case No.: 6:21-cv-00755
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`THALES VISIONIX, INC.,
`
`Involuntary Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`FACEBOOK, INC. and FACEBOOK
`TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiffs Gentex Corporation (“Gentex”) and Indigo Technologies, LLC (“Indigo”) file
`
`this Complaint for Patent Infringement and Demand for Jury Trial against Facebook, Inc.
`
`(“Facebook”) and Facebook Technologies, LLC (“Facebook Technologies”) and allege the
`
`following:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a civil action for infringement under the patent laws of the United States,
`
`35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., to redress Defendants’ unauthorized and knowing use of Plaintiffs’
`
`patented virtual reality and motion tracking technologies in Defendants’ Oculus Rift S, Oculus
`
`Quest, and Oculus Quest 2 products (collectively, with their respective related instructions,
`
`systems, services, and software, the “Accused Products”).
`
`2.
`
`Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,757,068 (the
`
`“’068 patent”), 7,301,648 (the “’648 patent”), 8,224,024 (the “’024 patent”), 6,922,632 (the
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 2 of 39
`
`
`
`“’632 patent”), and 7,725,253 (the “’253 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”) in the
`
`market of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and gaming, with the right
`
`to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use.
`
`3.
`
`Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe, directly and indirectly, one or
`
`more claims of each of the Asserted Patents by making, using, selling, and offering to sell the
`
`Accused Products. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages to compensate for the harm caused by such
`
`infringement.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiff Gentex Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`business in Carbondale, Pennsylvania.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Indigo Technologies, LLC is a Pennsylvania limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business in Simpson, Pennsylvania. Indigo is wholly owned by
`
`Gentex. Indigo was previously the exclusive field-of-use licensee of the Asserted Patents in the
`
`fields of entertainment and gaming, with the right to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive
`
`field of use. Indigo assigned its rights under its exclusive field-of-use license to Gentex effective
`
`July 1, 2021, including the right to sue for infringement before the date of the assignment.
`
`6.
`
`Involuntary Plaintiff Thales Visionix, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its
`
`principal place of business at 22605 Gateway Center Drive, Clarksburg, Maryland 20871.
`
`Thales Visionix is the assignee and sole and exclusive owner of the Asserted Patents. Thales
`
`Visionix is named as an involuntary plaintiff because it is the owner of the Asserted Patents and
`
`may have an interest therein. Pursuant to the license agreement Thales Visionix entered into
`
`with Indigo, Thales Visionix is obligated to join this action as a party plaintiff but has declined to
`
`do so, and Thales Visionix is outside the Court’s jurisdiction.
`
`7.
`
`Defendant Facebook, Inc. is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 3 of 39
`
`
`
`business at 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant Facebook Technologies, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business at 1601 Willow Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025. On
`
`information and belief, Facebook Technologies, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Facebook,
`
`Inc.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`9.
`
`This case arises under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. This Court has
`
`original jurisdiction over this controversy under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`
`10.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants under the Texas Long Arm
`
`Statute because, among other things, Defendants “recruit[] Texas residents, directly or through
`
`an intermediary located in this state, for employment inside or outside this state.” Tex. Civ.
`
`Prac. & Rem. Code § 17.042(3).
`
`11.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Facebook, including because Facebook
`
`does continuous and systematic business in this District, including by selling the Accused
`
`Products to residents of this District that Facebook knew would be used within this District in an
`
`infringing manner, and by soliciting business from residents of this District.
`
`12.
`
`Facebook is also subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court because, among
`
`other things, it has a regular and established place of business at its offices in this District,
`
`including multiple Facebook offices located in Austin, and elsewhere in Texas.
`
`13.
`
`Facebook’s newest Austin office is in a large office building known as “Third +
`
`Shoal,” occupying 256,500 square feet on 11 stories at 607 West Third Street, Austin, Texas
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 4 of 39
`
`
`
`78703.1 Facebook also maintains or has maintained offices at 300 West Sixth Street, Austin,
`
`Texas 78701, 11601 Alterra Parkway, Austin, Texas 78758, and the Parmer Innovation Center at
`
`13011 McCallen Pass, Austin, Texas 78753.2 Facebook’s multiple offices in Austin, Texas
`
`constitute regular and established places of business.
`
`14.
`
`Facebook has also reportedly leased the entire 320,000 square foot Domain 12
`
`building in Austin,3 and is seeking to lease another 1,000,000 square feet in Austin.4
`
`15.
`
`As of August 2020, Facebook had over 1,300 employees in Austin across its
`
`multiple offices.5 Facebook’s Austin employees work in at least the following teams: AR/VR,
`
`Advertising Technology, Business Development & Partnerships, Communications & Public
`
`Policy, Software Engineering, Legal, Enterprise Engineering, People & Recruiting, Design &
`
`User Experience, Infrastructure, Data & Analytics, and Sales & Marketing.6 Facebook is
`
`
`1 Erin Edgemon, First look: Facebook Headcount Swells as Social Media Giant Opens New
`Austin Office, https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2019/09/04/first-look-facebook-
`headcount-swells-as-social.html (Sept. 4, 2019).
`2 Id.
`3 Paul Thompson, Facebook Still Hiring in Austin; No Plans To Give Up Splashy Office Space
`Around Town, Top Local Exec Says,
`https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2020/08/01/facebook-still-growing-in-austin-
`pandemic.html (August 1, 2020); Will Anderson & Marissa Luck, Facebook To Eat Up Big
`Chunk Of Austin’s Second Downtown, Sources Say,
`https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2018/09/06/facebook-to-eat-up-big-chunk-of-austins-
`second.html (Sept. 6, 2018).
`4 Kathryn Hardison, Sources: Facebook Wants 1M More Square Feet Downtown,
`https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2020/12/04/facebook-could-be-expanding-again-in-
`austin.html?s=print (Dec. 4, 2020).
`5 Paul Thompson, Facebook Still Hiring in Austin; No Plans To Give Up Splashy Office Space
`Around Town, Top Local Exec Says,
`https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2020/08/01/facebook-still-growing-in-austin-
`pandemic.html (August 1, 2020).
`6 Facebook, Jobs in Austin, TX,
`https://www.facebook.com/careers/locations/austin/?p[offices][0]=Austin%2C%20TX&offices[0
`]=Austin%2C%20TX&results_per_page=100# (last visited Mar. 13, 2021).
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 5 of 39
`
`
`
`currently advertising about 273 jobs in Austin,7 including multiple openings in “VR and AR”—
`
`i.e., virtual reality and augmented reality.8
`
`16.
`
`On information and belief, the “VR and AR” team includes employees who work
`
`on the Accused Products. For example, Facebook is recruiting for multiple positions at
`
`“Facebook Reality Labs,” including in Austin, Texas, which includes responsibility for “Oculus”
`
`products and “AR and VR software and content.”9
`
`17.
`
`Based on publicly-available information, since 2012, Facebook has employed
`
`approximately 289 recipients of H-1B visas who work in Austin.10
`
`18.
`
`Facebook, directly and through agents, regularly conducts, solicits, and transacts
`
`business in this District and elsewhere in Texas, including through sales of the Accused Products
`
`and by providing services related to the Accused Products.
`
`19.
`
`In particular, Facebook has committed and continues to commit acts of
`
`infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and has made, used, marketed, distributed, offered
`
`for sale, and sold infringing products in Texas, including in this District, and engaged in
`
`infringing conduct within and directed at or from this District. The infringing Accused Products
`
`and related services have been and continue to be distributed and used in this District.
`
`20.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Facebook Technologies, including
`
`
`7 Id.
`8 Facebook, Jobs in AR/VR, https://www.facebook.com/careers/areas-of-
`work/arvr/?p[teams][0]=AR%2FVR&teams[0]=AR%2FVR&offices[0]=Austin%2C%20TX#op
`enpositions (last visited June 1, 2021).
`9 Facebook, Digital Design Engineer, Facebook Reality Labs,
`https://www.facebook.com/careers/v2/jobs/2280933422206464/ (last visited June 1, 2021);
`Facebook, Privacy Product Strategist, Facebook Reality Labs,
`https://www.facebook.com/careers/v2/jobs/725356615060171/ (last visited June 4, 2021).
`10 https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=facebook&job=&city=austin&year=All+Years (last visited
`July 22, 2021).
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 6 of 39
`
`
`
`because Facebook Technologies does continuous and systematic business in this District,
`
`including by selling the Accused Products to residents of this District that Facebook
`
`Technologies knew would be used within this District in an infringing manner, and by soliciting
`
`business from residents of this District.
`
`21.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Facebook Technologies, in part because
`
`Facebook Technologies does continuous and systematic business in this District, including by
`
`selling the Accused Products to residents of this District that Facebook Technologies knew
`
`would be used within this District in an infringing manner, and by soliciting business from
`
`residents of this District.
`
`22.
`
`In particular, Facebook Technologies has committed and continues to commit acts
`
`of infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and has made, used, marketed, distributed,
`
`offered for sale, and sold infringing products in Texas, including in this District, and engaged in
`
`infringing conduct within and directed at or from this District, including through the Oculus
`
`website.11 The infringing Accused Products and related services have been and continue to be
`
`distributed and used in this District.
`
`23.
`
`Facebook Technologies is a wholly owned subsidiary of Facebook that markets,
`
`sells, and offers for sale the Accused Products, including on the Oculus website. On information
`
`and belief, Facebook Technologies works in concert with Facebook and/or induces and/or is
`
`induced by Facebook to make, use, sell, or offer to sell the Accused Products throughout the
`
`United States, or import such products into the United States.
`
`24.
`
`Facebook does not separately report revenue from Facebook Technologies in its
`
`filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission, but reports combined revenue from its
`
`
`11 https://www.oculus.com/
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 7 of 39
`
`
`
`various products including the Accused Products. In particular, Facebook reports “Other
`
`revenue” which includes revenue from delivery of consumer hardware devices.12 For 2020,
`
`Facebook reported $1.796 billion of “Other revenue.” On information and belief, a substantial
`
`portion of Facebook’s “Other revenue” was attributable to sales and deliveries of the Accused
`
`Products. For example, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has confirmed that sales of the Oculus
`
`Quest 2 drove a 156% increase in Facebook’s non-advertising revenue.13
`
`25.
`
`On information and belief, Facebook not only owns but also operates Facebook
`
`Technologies, including cooperative development and support of Facebook Technologies sales
`
`and services. For example, Facebook requires users of the Oculus Quest 2 to use a Facebook
`
`login and agree to Facebook’s terms of services.14 On information and belief, since 2019,
`
`Oculus data, including which applications users use, has been used to provide advertisements on
`
`Facebook for linked Oculus and Facebook accounts. In short, the Accused Products are
`
`“Facebook’s apps and technologies.”15
`
`26.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and § 1400(b) because a
`
`substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this District, and
`
`because Defendants have committed acts of infringement in this District and have a regular and
`
`
`12 Facebook 2020 10-K, https://sec.report/Document/0001326801-21-000014/ (Jan. 28, 2021).
`13 Ben Lang, Zuckerberg: Quest 2 ‘on track to be first mainstream VR headset’, Next Headset
`Confirmed, https://www.roadtovr.com/zuckerberg-quest-2-mainstream-vr-headset-facebook-q4-
`2020-earnings/ (Jan. 27, 2021).
`14 Oculus Blog, A Single Way to Log Into Oculus and Unlock Social Features,
`https://www.oculus.com/blog/a-single-way-to-log-into-oculus-and-unlock-social-features/ (Aug.
`18, 2020). Facebook has made “it clear that the Oculus platform is provided by Facebook and
`will include information on how our users’ data is managed.” Id.; see Harry Baker, Everything
`You Need To Know: Facebook Login, User Data and Privacy on Oculus Headsets,
`https://uploadvr.com/facebook-login-privacy-data-quest-2/ (Jan. 31, 2021).
`15 Oculus Blog, A Single Way to Log Into Oculus and Unlock Social Features,
`https://www.oculus.com/blog/a-single-way-to-log-into-oculus-and-unlock-social-features/ (Aug.
`18, 2020).
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 8 of 39
`
`
`
`established place of business in this District.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`I.
`
`INTERSENSE AND ERIC FOXLIN’S INVENTIONS IN SOURCELESS
`VIRTUAL REALITY
`
`27.
`
`Eric Foxlin is a prolific inventor and entrepreneur named on 27 United States
`
`patents in the fields of inertial tracking and virtual reality. Mr. Foxlin’s innovations began at the
`
`Research Laboratory of Electronics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he
`
`helped develop the world’s first inertial human motion tracker.
`
`28.
`
`In 1996 Mr. Foxlin founded the company Intersense, Inc. and became its Chief
`
`Technology Officer. Intersense became the first company in the world to exploit inertial sensors
`
`in human-machine interaction.
`
`29.
`
`Intersense was acquired by, and became a subsidiary of, Gentex in 2011.16 Mr.
`
`Foxlin continued to lead Intersense after that acquisition.
`
`30.
`
`In 2012, Intersense was acquired by the Thales Group, a global technology and
`
`defense company. Intersense became Thales Visionix, Inc., and operated as a subsidiary of
`
`Thales Group. Mr. Foxlin became the Director of Advanced Programs at Thales Visionix and
`
`continued to lead development of inertial tracking systems, including systems to aid flight pilot
`
`situational awareness.
`
`II.
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS
`
`31.
`
`U.S. Patent 6,757,068 (the “’068 patent”) is entitled “Self-Referenced Tracking”
`
`and issued on June 29, 2004. A true and correct copy of the ’068 patent is attached as Exhibit A
`
`to this Complaint. Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of the ’068 patent in the market
`
`
`16 Press Release, Gentex Corporation Announces Acquisition of Intersense Incorporated,
`https://www.gentexcorp.com/gentex-corporation-announces-acquisition-of-intersense-
`incorporated/ (Nov. 21, 2011).
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 9 of 39
`
`
`
`of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and gaming, with the right to sue
`
`for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use. The ’068 patent is valid and enforceable
`
`under the United States patent laws.
`
`32.
`
`The ’068 patent claims are directed to patent-eligible inventions. They recite,
`
`among other things, specifically configured head-mounted tracking systems and methods of use
`
`that are advantageously sourceless—that is, they can be used anywhere with no set-up of an
`
`external source that is not on the user’s body, making the systems more accessible, intuitive, and
`
`easy-to-use. The systems and methods of the ’068 patent claims also include specific
`
`configurations and methods to address problems that arise in the unique context of virtual reality
`
`devices, including specific and novel methods of correcting for tracking errors in systems that do
`
`not use an external source—for example, the “drift” of the position of one sensor relative to
`
`another. These claimed configurations and methods constituted new and inventive tracking
`
`concepts enabling immersive visualization even in unprepared environments and thus provided
`
`advantages over the prior art. It was not well-understood, routine, or conventional to configure
`
`or use a head-mounted tracking system as claimed in the ’068 patent at the time of the patent’s
`
`effective filing date.
`
`33.
`
`U.S. Patent 7,301,648 (the “’648 patent”) is entitled “Self-Referenced Tracking”
`
`and issued on November 27, 2007. A true and correct copy of the ’648 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit B to this Complaint. Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of the ’648 patent in
`
`the market of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and gaming, with the
`
`right to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use. The ’648 patent is valid and
`
`enforceable under the United States patent laws.
`
`34.
`
`The ’648 patent claims are directed to patent-eligible inventions. They recite,
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 10 of 39
`
`
`
`among other things, methods of using specifically configured head-mounted tracking systems
`
`that are advantageously sourceless—that is, they can be used anywhere with no set-up of an
`
`external source that is not on the user’s body, making the systems more accessible, intuitive, and
`
`easy-to-use. The methods of the ’648 patent claims also include specific methods to address
`
`problems that arise in the unique context of virtual reality devices, including specific and novel
`
`methods of correcting for tracking errors in systems that do not use an external source—for
`
`example, the drift of the position of one sensor relative to another. These claimed methods
`
`constituted new and inventive tracking concepts enabling immersive visualization even in
`
`unprepared environments and thus provided advantages over the prior art. It was not well-
`
`understood, routine, or conventional to configure or use a head-mounted tracking system as
`
`claimed in the ’648 patent at the time of the patent’s effective filing date.
`
`35.
`
`U.S. Patent 8,224,024 (the “’024 patent”) is entitled “Tracking Objects with
`
`Markers” and issued on July 27, 2012. A true and correct copy of the ’024 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit C to this Complaint. Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of the ’024 patent in
`
`the market of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and gaming, with the
`
`right to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use. The ’024 patent is valid and
`
`enforceable under the United States patent laws.
`
`36.
`
`The ’024 patent claim is directed to a patent-eligible invention. It recites a
`
`specific improvement to tracking an object using both pitch information from a sensor on the
`
`object and coordinate information from two points on an object. This method improved upon
`
`prior tracking methods that required more than two points on an object, and thus provided
`
`advantages over the prior art that required more cameras and/or tracking markers. The claimed
`
`method thus makes it possible to use small or inexpensive cameras in combination with inertial
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 11 of 39
`
`
`
`sensors to still achieve six-degree-of-freedom tracking performance—tracking along three
`
`rotational and three translational axes—by integrating information from an inertial sensor. It was
`
`not well-understood, routine, or conventional to track an object as claimed in the ’024 patent at
`
`the time of the patent’s effective filing date.
`
`37.
`
`U.S. Patent 6,922,632 (the “’632 patent”) is entitled “Tracking, Auto-Calibration,
`
`and Map-Building System” and issued on July 26, 2005. A true and correct copy of the ’632
`
`patent is attached as Exhibit D to this Complaint. Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of
`
`the ’632 patent in the market of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and
`
`gaming, with the right to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use. The ’632
`
`patent is valid and enforceable under the United States patent laws.
`
`38.
`
`The ’632 patent claims are directed to patent-eligible inventions. The claims
`
`recite specific improvements to tracking systems, including by applying sensor configuration
`
`information to update the estimated position and orientation of an object, and thus provided
`
`advantages over the prior art. Among other things, the claims enable versatile functionalities
`
`such that the system can, for example, switch between simultaneous tracking and other
`
`applications. It was not well-understood, routine, or conventional to implement sensor
`
`configuration information to track an object as claimed in the ’632 patent at the time of the
`
`patent’s effective filing date.
`
`39.
`
`U.S. Patent 7,725,253 (the “’253 patent”) is entitled “Tracking, Auto-Calibration,
`
`and Map-Building System” and issued on May 25, 2010. A true and correct copy of the ’253
`
`patent is attached as Exhibit E to this Complaint. Gentex is the exclusive field-of-use licensee of
`
`the ’253 patent in the market of consumer electronic products in the fields of entertainment and
`
`gaming, with the right to sue for infringement thereof in its exclusive fields-of-use. The ’253
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 12 of 39
`
`
`
`patent is valid and enforceable under the United States patent laws.
`
`40.
`
`The ’253 patent claims are directed to patent-eligible inventions. The claims
`
`recite a specific improvement to tracking systems, including by applying sensor configuration
`
`information to update the estimated position and orientation of an object, and thus provided
`
`advantages over the prior art. Among other things, the claims enable versatile functionalities
`
`such that the system can, for example, switch between simultaneous tracking and other
`
`applications. It was not well-understood, routine, or conventional to implement sensor
`
`configuration information to track an object as claimed in the ’253 patent at the time of the
`
`patent’s effective filing date.
`
`41.
`
`The Asserted Patents claim, among other things, specific implementations of
`
`solutions to problems in tracking and monitoring systems. For example, the patents describe
`
`specific advantages achieved by the claimed systems and methods compared to conventional
`
`tracking systems. E.g., Ex. A, ’068 patent at 1:10-45; Ex. B, ’648 patent at 1:17-52; Ex. C, ’024
`
`patent at 2:27-3:25; Ex. D, ’632 patent at 2:35-46; Ex. E, ’253 patent at 2:36-47.
`
`42.
`
`The Asserted Patents further claim inventive concepts that are substantially more
`
`than abstract ideas. For example, the claimed technologies were not well-understood, routine, or
`
`conventional, and they achieve specific technological advances. E.g., Ex. A, ’068 patent at 1:35-
`
`45; Ex. B, ’648 patent at 1:40-52; Ex. C, ’024 patent at 2:27-3:25; Ex. D, ’632 patent at 2:35-46;
`
`Ex. E, ’253 patent at 2:36-47.
`
`III. THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS
`
`43.
`
`Facebook entered the market for virtual reality devices with its acquisition of
`
`Oculus VR, Inc., which was announced in March 2014.17 Facebook originally disclosed that it
`
`
`17 Facebook to Acquire Oculus, https://about.fb.com/news/2014/03/facebook-to-acquire-oculus/
`(Mar. 25, 2014).
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 13 of 39
`
`
`
`acquired Oculus for $2 billion, but later confirmed that it paid hundreds of millions of dollars
`
`more than that.18 The acquisition closed on July 21, 2014.
`
`44.
`
`The first virtual reality device marketed by Defendants was the Oculus Rift,
`
`which was released in 2016. Unlike the Accused Products, the Oculus Rift used external sensors
`
`for tracking, as shown below:19
`
`45.
`
`Defendants’ next virtual reality device was the Oculus Quest. Defendants
`
`announced the Oculus Quest no later than September 26, 2018, began taking preorders no later
`
`than April 30, 2019,20 and began delivering the Oculus Quest to customers on May 21, 2019,
`
`when Defendants began offering the Oculus Quest for retail sale.
`
`
`
`
`
`18 Lisa Maria Garza, Facebook’s Zuckerberg Questioned at Trial over Virtual-Reality
`Technology, Reuters (Jan. 17, 2017), https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-
`zuckerberg/facebooks-zuckerberg-questioned-at-trial-over-virtual-reality-technology-
`idUSKBN1512GO.
`19 How Do I Set Up My Play Area for Oculus Rift and Rift S?, Oculus Support,
`https://support.oculus.com/1814957818761397/; Dominic Brennan, Oculus Cuts Price of Rift
`Sensors to $59, RoadToVR (Mar. 3, 2017), https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-cuts-price-rift-
`sensors-59/.
`20 Oculus Blog, Game On: Oculus Quest and Rift S Pre-Orders Are Live! Shipping Begins May
`21, https://www.oculus.com/blog/game-on-oculus-quest-and-rift-s-pre-orders-are-live-shipping-
`begins-may-21/ (Apr. 30, 2019).
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 14 of 39
`
`
`
`46.
`
`Unlike the Oculus Rift, the Oculus Quest (pictured below) featured sourceless
`
`tracking. Reviewers praised “Facebook’s first standalone headset that offers [six-degrees-of-
`
`freedom] tracking on both the head and hands,” explaining that sourceless tracking (e.g., “inside-
`
`out tracking”) “is perhaps the most important element” of the device.21
`
`
`
`47.
`
`Defendants released the Oculus Rift S around the same time as the Oculus Quest.
`
`Defendants announced the Oculus Rift S in March 2019, began taking preorders no later than
`
`April 30, 2019,22 and began delivering the Oculus Rift S to customers on May 21, 2019, the
`
`same day as the Oculus Quest.
`
`48.
`
`Like the Oculus Quest, the Oculus Rift S (pictured below) uses sourceless
`
`tracking, which reviewers have described as an important feature.23
`
`
`21 E.g., Ben Lang, Oculus Quest Review – The First Great Standalone VR Headset, RoadToVR
`(May 21, 2019), https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-quest-review-the-first-great-standalone-vr-
`headset/.
`22 Oculus Blog, Game On: Oculus Quest and Rift S Pre-Orders Are Live! Shipping Begins May
`21, https://www.oculus.com/blog/game-on-oculus-quest-and-rift-s-pre-orders-are-live-shipping-
`begins-may-21/ (Apr. 30, 2019).
`23 Ben Lang, Oculus Rift S Revealed with Inside-out Tracking, Resolution Bump, & New
`Ergonomics, RoadToVR (Mar. 20, 2019), https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-rift-s-specs-release-
`date-announcement-gdc-2019/.
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 15 of 39
`
`
`
`
`
`49.
`
`Defendants’ most recent virtual reality product is the Oculus Quest 2. Defendants
`
`announced and began taking pre-orders for the Oculus Quest 2 on September 16, 2020, and
`
`began delivering the Oculus Quest 2 to customers on October 13, 2020, when Defendants began
`
`offering the Oculus Quest 2 for retail sale.
`
`50.
`
`Like the Oculus Quest, the Oculus Quest 2 (pictured below) is a standalone
`
`headset, and like the Quest and Rift S, it uses sourceless tracking. As with the Quest, Reviewers
`
`singled out the Quest 2’s sourceless (i.e., “inside-out”) tracking system for praise.24
`
`
`24 Ben Lang, Oculus Quest 2 Review – The Best Standalone Headset Gets Better in (Almost)
`Every Way, RoadToVR (Oct. 13, 2020), https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-quest-2-review-
`better-in-almost-every-way/2/; Oculus Quest 2, Facebook Technologies,
`https://www.oculus.com/quest-2/.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 16 of 39
`
`
`
`
`
`51.
`
`Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg has announced that he believes that the
`
`Oculus Quest 2 is “on track to be the first mainstream virtual reality headset.”25
`
`IV. DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND CONTINUED
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`52.
`
`Defendants have been on actual notice of the Asserted Patents since long before
`
`this Complaint and have continued to infringe directly and indirectly the Asserted Patents with
`
`actual knowledge or reckless disregard for the fact that their actions constitute acts of
`
`infringement.
`
`53.
`
`For example, Facebook performed detailed due diligence in connection with its
`
`$2-plus-billion-dollar acquisition of Oculus VR, Inc. in 2014. Facebook’s CEO has testified that
`
`Facebook employees conducted “technical diligence … trying to learn about the virtual reality
`
`field” before the acquisition, and that diligence lasted for “months.” 26 Mr. Zuckerberg further
`
`testified that investigation into “intellectual property” was an “automatic[] thing” that would
`
`
`25 Ian Hamilton, Mark Zuckerberg: Quest 2 ‘Is On Track To Be The First Mainstream VR
`Headset’, RoadToVR (Jan. 27, 2021), https://uploadvr.com/mark-zuckerberg-quest-2-
`mainstream/.
`26 Zenimax Media Inc. v. Oculus VR Inc., No. 14-cv-01849, ECF No. 928, at 618:14-18, 667:23-
`668:23 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 17, 2017).
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 17 of 39
`
`
`
`have been examined before closing the deal with Oculus.27
`
`54.
`
`On information and belief, Facebook became aware of and reviewed each of the
`
`Asserted Patents during due diligence and investigation into virtual reality technology and
`
`intellectual property prior to its 2014 acquisition of Oculus VR, Inc.
`
`55.
`
`The Asserted Patents and named inventor Eric Foxlin are prominently known and
`
`widely cited in the virtual reality field, and should have surfaced in any diligent search, as
`
`described publicly by Facebook’s CEO.
`
`56.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants also became aware of the Asserted Patents
`
`during prosecution of their own patents. On information and belief, Defendants share a legal
`
`department and knowledge of the Asserted Patents through their patent prosecution activities,
`
`which are ultimately controlled by Facebook.
`
`57.
`
`Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’024 patent since no later than May
`
`31, 2018, when Facebook cited U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2007/0081695 corresponding to the
`
`’024 patent during prosecution of Facebook’s own U.S. Patent No. 10,594,396, naming as
`
`inventors Chiyun Xia, Harvard Keese Harding, Jr., Chien-Chung Chen, and Ferze Daligues
`
`Patawaran.28 On information and belief, knowing the relevance of that publication to their own
`
`technology, Defendants identified and reviewed the ’024 patent upon issuance.
`
`58.
`
`Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’253 patent since no later than May
`
`31, 2018, when Facebook cited the ’253 patent during prosecution of Facebook’s own U.S.
`
`Patent No. 10,594,396.29 On information and belief, knowing the relevance of the ’253 patent to
`
`their own technology, this prosecution put Defendants on notice of other patents in the same
`
`
`27 Id. at 671:1-22.
`28 U.S. Patent Application 15/986,148, Information Disclosure Statement (May 31, 2018).
`29 Id.
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00755 Document 1 Filed 07/22/21 Page 18 of 39
`
`
`
`family as the ’253 patent at the same time, including at least the ’632 patent which is the parent
`
`of the ’253 patent and listed on the face of the ’632