Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID 2433 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Transcription

1 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID 2433 STEVEN J. KANIADAKIS Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION v. Case No: 8:17-cv-1346-T-17-JSS SALESFORCE.COM, INC. Defendant. / INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff, STEVEN J. KANIADAKIS ( Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, for its Complaint against Defendant SALESFORCE.COM, INC. ( Defendant or Salesforce ), alleges the following: THE PARTIES 1. Plaintiff is an individual with a principal place of residence at th Ave. South, St. Petersburg, Florida On information and belief, Defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of The State of Delaware with a principal place of business at The Landmark at One Market, Suite 300, San Francisco, California On information and belief, Defendant has a physical location for performing business operations at 4301 W Boy Scout Blvd, Tampa, FL

2 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 2 of 11 PageID 2434 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code. This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over this case for patent infringement under 28 U.S.C and 1338(a). 4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant for at least the following reasons: (1) Defendant has a physical place in this District and it is a regular and established place of business; (2) Defendant has and continues to commit acts of patent infringement and induced acts of patent infringement by others in this District; (3) Defendant engages in other persistent courses of conduct and derives substantial revenue from products and/or services provided to individuals and businesses in this District; and (4) Defendant has purposefully established systematic and continuous contacts with this District and should reasonably expect to be brought to Court here. 5. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and (c), and 1400(b) because Defendant has a physical place in this District that is a regular and established place of business, Defendant does business in this District, and Defendant has committed acts of infringement in this District. THE ASSERTED PATENT 6. On March 04, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office ( USPTO ) duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,666,772 ( the 772 patent or Asserted Patent ), entitled, Process, System, Method creating medical billing code letters, electronic super-bill and Communication to Steven J. Kaniadakis. A true and correct copy of the patent 772 is attached Exhibit A. Plaintiff is the owner of the 772 patent and he 2

3 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 3 of 11 PageID 2435 holds and owns all rights and interest in that patent. The Asserted Patent is valid and enforceable. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7. Voice over internet protocol ( VoIP ) started to become widespread in the early 2000 s, allowing for voice communications, messaging and multimedia sessions to be delivered over Internet networks. In the late 2000 s, smartphones became a mainstream commodity and gave consumers the power of having a computer like device in the palm of their hands. This enabled both the ability to search the Internet from the smartphone, but also to use the Internet for making and receiving voice communications and multimedia sessions utilizing VoIP. Services such as Skype and Google Talk became available to use on the computer, computing device, and smartphone and changed the way that consumers communicated with each other. 8. There was still a problem each time a call was to be made either through computer or smartphone, the number had to be manually entered. It didn t matter if the number was listed on a website, in a Customer Relationship Management ( CRM ) software platform, on search pages, or in a document. If the user desired to have a smartphone make a call using VoIP, the user had to both copy and paste the phone number, or manually enter the number into the VoIP software. The only way to have the smartphone automatically dial a number was to have it pre-programmed into the phone s directory or contact list and then it would use the cellular connection to dial the phone number, but it would not automatically use the VoIP option. In essence, the 3

4 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 4 of 11 PageID 2436 phone number listed on a computer or smartphone was dead without any link or ability to interact with any VoIP software installed on that device. 9. Ultimately, Plaintiff, the inventor of the Asserted Patent, discovered that a phone number listed on any website, like search pages or in a CRM could be made to become interactive, thereby allowing the computer, computing device, or smartphone to invoke the number through any available action. Such action could include but not be limited too, clicking with a mouse, touching with a finger, voice activation, etc. Once the action was invoked, it enabled the computer, computing device, or smartphone to make the phone call utilizing various types of VoIP provider programs, and the users become free to choose their own providers for voice and messaging programs. 10. Plaintiff s invention turned dead or static numbers into live and dynamic interactive phone calling numbers. Thus, giving each user the ability to select their VoIP provider and use their computer, computing device, or smartphone to create an automatic calling action initiated right from each of the various phone numbers from virtually any program. This method previously did not exist compared to invoking the pre-programmed and pre-installed actions of computers and smartphones enabled with VoIP. 11. Plaintiff s invention was disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 8,666,772 ( the 772 patent ), specifically in claims Plaintiff practices embodiments of the claimed invention in the patent 772. Plaintiff s patented methods are enabling phone numbers to invoke VoIP or voice technology. 4

5 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 5 of 11 PageID 2437 For example, computer related products embodying the patented methods can be can be found at; and and among other sites. 13. Plaintiff is striving to derive revenue from the software related products embodying the patented methods and from the licensing of the patented methods to third parties. INFRINGEMENT OF THE ASSERTED PATENT 14. Defendant has and had notice by at least one U.S. Post Office certified letter mailed as early as March 29, 2012, by USPTO pre-issue publication date, by USPTO issue date of the Asserted Patent, and at least by delivery of this Complaint. 15. Defendant has decided to infringe on the method claims in the 772 patent instead of properly licensing this method from Plaintiff, and Defendant has generated enormous sums of revenue by utilizing these methods while violating the Plaintiff s patent rights. The Defendant infringes on the method claims through click to dial feature within the Defendant s CRM. An example of this is described here: Defendant has decided to induce infringement of other third parties by providing the ability to implement the patented method. Despite having pre-suit knowledge of the Asserted Patent, they continue to encourage other third parties to infringe on the patented methods. Two examples of the Defendant using the Plaintiff s patented methods can be shown here: and at 5

6 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 6 of 11 PageID The Defendant s infringement is implemented in products within their CRM, and Lightning Voice or Lightning Dialer products where Click to Dial is enabled in order to perform at least one of the methods in the 772 patent. The Defendant offers these options to other third parties. 18. Defendant continues to infringe on the 772 patent by directly performing the patented methods through its development and promotion of its reference links and through its connection to clicktodial ( Click to Dial ) and its related products, features, and functionality. Furthermore, the Defendant provides the ability for third parties to license the Click to Dial feature which is a lucrative revenue stream and is in complete violation of the Plaintiff s entitled patent rights and directly affects Plaintiff s existing business revenues. 19. Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent identified in this Complaint provides Defendant with unique functionality for its CRM platform, related products and services that is the result of Plaintiff s innovation not Defendant s. Defendant has not obtained any permission or license from Plaintiff which allows them to make, use, offer to sell, or sell the methods covered by the 772 patent. COUNT I DIRECT INFRINGEMENT OF THE 772 PATENT 20. Plaintiff incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 19 of this Complaint. 21. Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe, directly or under the Doctrine of Equivalents, one or more claims of the 772 Patent by using, selling and/or offering to sell in the United States and/or importing into the United States and exporting out of the United States, one or more of Defendant s software products that infringe on the 6

7 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 7 of 11 PageID 2439 methods in Plaintiff s 772 patent, including those software products identified in this Complaint. Defendant s infringing activities violate 35 U.S.C. 271(a). 22. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent has been and continues to be intentional, willful, and without regard to Plaintiff s rights. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent is and has been intentional, deliberate, and willful at least because it had pre-suit knowledge of the 772 patent through direct or indirect communications with Plaintiff and/or as a result of its participation in the CRM software development industry. 23. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant has gained revenues by virtue of its infringement of the 772 patent. 24. Plaintiff has sustained damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent. 25. Plaintiff will suffer and is suffering irreparable harm from Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and is entitled to an injunction against Defendant s continuing infringement of the 772 patent. Unless enjoined, Defendant will continue its infringing conduct. 26. Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent renders this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C COUNT II INDUCED INFRINGEMENT OF THE 772 PATENT 27. Plaintiff incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 19 of this Complaint. 7

8 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 8 of 11 PageID Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe, indirectly through induced infringement, by (1) actively encouraging infringement by third parties, knowing that the acts they induce constitute patent infringement, and (2) the encouragement of these acts results in direct patent infringement, of one or more claims of the 772 Patent by using, selling and/or offering to sell in the United States and/or importing into the United States and exporting out of the United States, one or more of Defendant s software products or developer guides that encourage infringement on the methods in the 772 patent by Defendant s electronic links to the methods, including those software products and developer guide reference links identified in this Complaint. Defendant s infringing activities violate 35 U.S.C. 271(b). 29. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent has been and continues to be intentional, willful, and without regard to Plaintiff s rights. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent is and has been intentional, deliberate, and willful at least because it had pre-suit knowledge of the 772 patent through direct or indirect communications with Plaintiff and/or as a result of its participation in the CRM software development industry. 30. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant has gained revenues by virtue of its infringement of the 772 patent. 31. Plaintiff has sustained damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent. 32. Plaintiff will suffer and is suffering irreparable harm from Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and is entitled to an 8

9 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 9 of 11 PageID 2441 injunction against Defendant s continuing infringement of the 772 patent. Unless enjoined, Defendant will continue its infringing conduct. 33. Defendant s infringement of the 772 patent renders this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief, as follows: 1. A judgment that Plaintiff asserted patent is valid and enforceable; 2. A judgment that Defendant has infringed, contributorily infringed, and/or induced infringement of one of more claims of Plaintiff s asserted patent; 3. An Order and judgment preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, affiliates, attorneys, and all others acting in privity or in concert with them, and their parents, subsidiaries, divisions, successors and assigns from further acts of infringement of Plaintiff asserted patent; 4. A judgment awarding Plaintiff all damages adequate to compensate for Defendant s infringement of Plaintiff Asserted Patent, and in no event less than a reasonable royalty for Defendant s acts of infringement, including all pre-judgment and postjudgment interest at the maximum rate permitted by law; 5. A judgment awarding Plaintiff all damages, including treble damages, based on any infringement found to be willful, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, together with prejudgment interest; 6. Actual damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result of Defendant s unlawful conduct, in an amount to be proven at trial, as well as prejudgment interest as authorized by law; 9

10 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 10 of 11 PageID A judgment that this is an exceptional case and an award to Plaintiff of its costs and reasonable attorneys fees incurred in this action as provided by 35 U.S.C. 285; and 8. Such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury on all issues raised by the Complaint. Respectfully submitted July 30, 2018 /s/ Thomas H. Stanton Thomas H. Stanton Florida Bar No Stanton IP Law Firm, P.A. 201 E Kennedy Blvd, Suite 825 Tampa, Florida Telephone: (813) tstanton@stantoniplaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 30, 2018, the foregoing was submitted for filing to the Clerk of the District Court by using the Case Management/Electronic Case Filing ("CM/ECF"), which will send a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF participants: For the Defendant: Manuel Kushner, Esq. Florida Bar No Phillips Point, East Tower, Suite 1000 West Palm Beach, FL Tel.: Fax:

11 Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 11 of 11 PageID Jeffrey A. Miller (Substituted counsel) 3000 El Camino Real Five Palo Alto Square, Suite 500 Palo Alto, CA Silicon Valley Phone: /s/ Thomas H. Stanton Thomas H. Stanton Florida Bar No Stanton IP Law Firm, P.A. 201 E Kennedy Blvd, Suite 825 Tampa, Florida Telephone: (813) tstanton@stantoniplaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff 11