Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 1 of 6
`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 1 of 6
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FORTHE WESTERNDISTRICT OFTEXAS F | L E D
`WACODIVISION
`03/14/2029
`CLERK US DISTRICT CO
`WESTERNDISTRICT
`OF TEXAG
`CIVIL ACTIONNo:
`6:22-cv-00
`TY CLERK
`COMPLAINT FOR INFINGEMENT
`OF U.S. PATENT11,077,877
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`ARSUS, LLC,
`
`v.
`
`TESLA,INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PlaintiffArsus, LLC, for its complaint, complains against DefendantTesla, Inc., formerly
`
`known as Tesla Motors, Inc., demandstrial by jury, and alleges that:
`
`I. THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Arsus, LLC (“Arsus” or “Plaintiff’) is a Utah limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business at 350 West 2000, South Perry, Utah 84302.
`
`2.
`
`DefendantTesla, Inc. (“Defendant”) is a corporation organized and existing under
`
`the laws of Delaware, with a regular and established place of business within this judicial
`
`district.
`
`3.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws ofthe United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction of such action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
`
`and 1338(a).
`
`4,
`
`5.
`
`Venueis properin this district under 28 U.S.C. sections 1381(b) and 1400(b).
`
`On August 3, 2021, United States Patent No. 11,077,877 (‘the ‘877 Patent”),
`
`entitled Rollover Prevention Apparatus, was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
`
`and Trademark Office. A copy of the ‘877 patentis attached to this complaint as Exhibit A.
`
`03/14/2022
`
`6:22-cv-00276
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 2 of 6
`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 2 of 6
`
`6.
`
`Within this district, Defendant has sold and offered for sale Tesla vehicles (the
`
`“accused vehicles”) which directly infringe the ’877 patent’s claims 1 to 21 (the “asserted
`
`claims”), and is continuing to sell and offer for sale accused vehicles, such as Tesla vehicle
`
`models S, 3, X, and Y, equipped with Tesla’s so-called Auto-pilot system, within this district.
`
`See the claim charts attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference.
`
`7. The asserted claims of the °877 patentcall for a rollover prevention apparatus. All
`
`asserted claims are apparatus claims. The accused Autopilot-equipped Tesla vehicles are steered
`
`by the Tesla Autopilot system (Autopilot) alone, when Autopilot is turned on(i.e., is in the active
`
`mode). Moreover, so long as Autopilotis in the active mode, Autopilot alone steers the Tesla
`
`vehicle:
`
`8. In 2014, Elon Musk, Tesla’s CEO/President/Controlling Shareholder said that, with
`
`Autopilot deployed: “We [meaning Tesla vehicles] can basically go between San Francisco and
`
`Seattle without the driver doing anything.” See Exhibit B to this complaint.
`
`9. A person in an accused Tesla vehicle that is being steered by Autopilot (i.e. Autopilot
`
`being in the active mode), can manually turn the steering wheel of the Tesla vehicle, but such act
`
`of manual steering turns Autopilotoff (i.e., transitions Autopilot into an inactive mode). Turning
`
`off Autopilot, by a person manually turning the steering wheel, returns the Tesla vehicle to being
`
`steered manually, instead of being steered by Autopilot.
`
`10. Turning the Tesla Autopilotoff (i.e., transitioning Autopilot from the active mode to
`
`an inactive mode), as by the driver (or other source) turning the steering wheel, to steer the Tesla
`
`manually, does not prevent an accused Tesla vehicles from infringing any asserted claim, when
`
`Autopilot is in active mode.
`
`11. No asserted claim calls for an apparatus that precludesthe transitioning ofAutopilot-
`
`whether by human operator or by other means, whether by the turning of a steering wheel or by
`
`other means - from the active mode to an inactive mode. Noasserted claim calls for an
`-2-
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 3 of 6
`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 3 of 6
`
`apparatus that precludes the manual steering of a vehicle.
`
`12. Tesla’s publicity for the accused vehicles indicates that the accused vehicles can steer
`
`themselves with no driver in the vehicles. See Exhibit C to this complaint for Tesla publicity
`
`images showing accused Tesla vehicles steering themselves, with no driver in the vehicle.
`
`13. Tesla has issued statements that Tesla vehicles, equipped with Autopilot, can steer a
`
`Tesla vehicle, including for trips hundreds of miles long, with no human driverin the car,
`
`meaning that Autopilot can and doessteer a Tesla vehicle, with no driver, or human ofany kind,
`
`such as a passenger, in the Tesla vehicle. See Exhibit B to this complaint.
`
`14. Autopilot alone steers manned, and unmanned, accused Tesla vehicles, when and so
`
`long as Autopilot system is in the active mode: So long as Autopilot is in the active mode,
`
`Autopilot prevents the accused Tesla vehicles, whether manned or unmanned,from steering
`
`beyond a threshold ofrollover, thereby directly infringing all of the asserted claims.
`
`15. Plaintiff ARUSis the assigneeofall right, title and interest in the ‘877 patent,
`
`including all rights to enforce and prosecute actions for Tesla’s infringement ofthis patent.
`
`16. Plaintiff ARSUS has been damaged as a result of Defendant’s infringing conduct.
`
`DefendantTeslais liable to PlaintiffARSUS for damages in an amountthat adequately
`
`compensates Plaintiff ARSUSfor this damage.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff, under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Local Rule 38(a),
`
`demandsa trial by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE,Plaintiff ARSUS requests that the Court find in ARSUS’ favor, against
`
`Defendant Tesla, and that the Court grant Plaintiff ARSUSthe followingrelief:
`
`a.
`
`Judgment that one or more claims of Plaintiff ARSUS’ ‘877 patent have been
`
`infringed by Defendant Tesla’s accused vehicles;
`-3-
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 4 of 6
`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 4 of 6
`
`b.
`
`Judgmentthat Defendant Tesla accountfor and pay to PlaintiffARSUSall damages
`
`to and costs incurred by Plaintiff because of Defendant’s infringing activities, and
`
`an accounting ofall infringements and damagesnotpresentedattrial;
`
`That Plaintiff ARSUSbe granted pre-judgment and post-judgmentinterest on the
`
`damagesarising from Defendant’s infringing activities; and
`
`That Plaintiff ARSUS be granted such other and further relief as the Court may
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`deem just and proper under the circumstances.
`
`March 9, 2022
`—_—
`Patrick Bright (SBN 68709)
`(Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice to
`be filed)
`Wagner, Anderson & Bright PC
`10524 W.Pico Boulevard #214
`Los Angeles, CA 90064
`(213) 700-6637
`pbright@brightpatentlaw.com
`
`By
`
`Ftp2
`Todd Brandt
`The Brandt Law Firm
`3114 Gannett Street
`Houston, TX 77025
`(713) 927-1999
`tbrandt@thebrandtlawfirm.com
`Attorneys for Arsus, LLC
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 5 of 6
`
`Wr$\orn
`ak Chas
`hove Roem 3b0
`RK Anenve
`
`>
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/15/22 Page 6 of 6
`
`he. Case 6:22-cv-00276-ADA-DTG Document Filed 03/15/22 Page 6 of6
`
`
`
`
`Nate \
`N.S. Qayt
`5. Coe
`S00
`Feu
`Wato ,
`
`we iy i
`B Rinin — r
`3114 S°NNETT ST.
`HOUSTOr
`TEXAS
`725
`
`
`
`