PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT. Plaintiff Newthink, LLC ( Plaintiff ), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 2:13-cv RAJ Document 1 Filed 08/30/10 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv GW-PLA Document 89 Filed 05/12/11 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:455

Case 2:13-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 12/10/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

FILED 2015 Mar-25 PM 03:41 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-50

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv JEI-KMW Document 1 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:15-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 07/08/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv TJW-CE Document 1 Filed 05/19/10 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION

Courthouse News Service

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Civil Action No: HON. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT

Case 2:14-cv JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/05/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No: COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 1:17-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

Case 3:17-cv AJB-KSC Document 1 Filed 05/23/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) Plaintiff,

Case 1:99-mc Document 417 Filed 05/23/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:18-cv YK Document 1 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff, The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC ( Green Pet Shop or. Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:15-cv-590 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION

Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/05/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1

Case 9:16-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/15/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Case 6:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:14-cv PMW Document 4 Filed 01/05/15 Page 1 of 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:09-cv CE Document 1 Filed 12/22/09 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236 COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Case No. 3:13-cv N

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 2:15-cv MJP Document 21 Filed 02/11/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv-3055

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 1:07-cv MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NOTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 3:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/26/16 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 123 Filed 03/09/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 842

Case 1:15-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 05/30/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 10/14/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Case 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 02/18/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv RM Document 1 Filed 04/30/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 24 PageID #: 1

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:17-cv GMS Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 01/12/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/20/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/27/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 2:18-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/27/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv JRG Document 15 Filed 12/19/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 77

Case 2:18-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 04/24/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1

Case 2:17-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 03/08/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

Transcription:

1 PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Plaintiff Newthink, LLC ( Plaintiff ), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this Original Complaint against Defendant Viewsonic Corporation ( Defendant or Viewsonic ) as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is a patent infringement action to stop Defendant s infringement of Plaintiff s United States Patent No.,0, entitled Portable, Read-Only Electronic Display Unit (hereinafter, the patent ; a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A). Plaintiff is the owner of the patent. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages. PARTIES. Plaintiff is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the state of Florida. Plaintiff maintains its principal place of business at Island Avenue, Suite, Miami, Florida. Plaintiff is the owner of the patent-in-suit and possesses the right to sue for infringement and recover past damages.. Upon information and belief, Defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business located at 1 Brea Canyon Road, Walnut, California. JURISDICTION AND VENUE. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, U.S.C. 1 et seq., including U.S.C. 1, 1,,, and. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case for patent infringement under U.S.C. 1 and (a).. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because: Defendant is present within or has minimum contacts with the State of California and the Central District of California; Defendant has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the State of California and in the Central District of California; Defendant has sought protection and benefit from the laws of the State of California; Defendant regularly conducts business within the State of California and within the Central District of California; and Plaintiff s causes of action arise directly 1

1 from Defendant s business contacts and other activities in the State of California and in the Central District of California.. More specifically, Defendant, directly and/or through authorized intermediaries, ships, distributes, offers for sale, sells, and/or advertises (including the provision of an interactive web page) its products and services in the United States, the State of California, and the Central District of California. Upon information and belief, Defendant has committed patent infringement in the State of California and in the Central District of California. Defendant solicits customers in the State of California and in the Central District of California. Defendant has many paying customers who are residents of the State of California and the Central District of California and who each use Defendant s products and services in the State of California and in the Central District of California.. Venue is proper in the Central District of California pursuant to U.S.C. 1 and 00(b). COUNT I PATENT INFRINGEMENT. The Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on October, 0, after full and fair examination for thin, flat, self-contained electronic display units. Plaintiff is the owner of the Patent and possesses all substantive rights and rights of recovery under the Patent, including the right to sue for infringement and recover past damages.. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Viewsonic makes, uses, sells, distributes and otherwise provides thin, flat, self-contained display units including, but not limited to, the gtablet, the Viewpad, Viewpad e, and Viewpad pro tablets ( the Viewsonic Devices ) and associated hardware and software. Upon information and belief, Viewsonic has infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the Patent by making, using, providing, offering to sell, and selling (directly or through intermediaries), in this district and elsewhere in the United States, thin, flat, self-contained display units, including the Viewsonic Devices. Viewsonic has further willfully infringed the patent, as Viewsonic has been aware of the patents-in-suit since at least April,

1 1, which is the date Plaintiff notified Viewsonic of the patent and the accused product identified above.. Defendant s aforesaid activities have been without authority and/or license from Plaintiff.. Plaintiff is entitled to recover from the Defendant the damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of the Defendant s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by this Court under U.S.C.. 1. Defendant s infringement of Plaintiff s exclusive rights under the patent will continue to damage Plaintiff, causing irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court. JURY DEMAND. Plaintiff hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court find in its favor and against Defendant, and that the Court grant Plaintiff the following relief: A. An adjudication that one or more claims of the Patent have been infringed, either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by the Defendant and that such infringement was willful; B. An award to Plaintiff of damages adequate to compensate Plaintiff for the Defendant s acts of infringement together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; C. A grant of permanent injunction pursuant to U.S.C., enjoining the Defendant from further acts of infringement with respect to the claims of the Patent; D. That this Court declare this to be an exceptional case and award Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys fees and costs in accordance with U.S.C. ; and

E. Any further relief that this Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 1 Dated: November, 1 Steven W. Ritcheson, Attorney for Plaintiff NEWTHINK, LLC