Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Smart Modular Technologies v. Netlist

Smart Modular Technologies v. Netlist

Ratings: (0)|Views: 200 |Likes:
Published by PriorSmart
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB: Smart Modular Technologies, Inc. v. Netlist, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, the Hon. Morrison C. England presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l6Gx for more info.
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB: Smart Modular Technologies, Inc. v. Netlist, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, the Hon. Morrison C. England presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l6Gx for more info.

More info:

Published by: PriorSmart on Sep 11, 2012
Copyright:Public Domain

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/01/2013

pdf

text

original

 
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728NORMAN C. HILE (STATE BAR NO. 57299)nhile@orrick.comSTACY E. DON (STATE BAR NO. 226737)sdon@orrick.comORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP400 Capitol Mall, Suite 3000Sacramento, CA 95814-4497Telephone: (916) 447-9200Facsimile: (916) 329-4900MICHAEL F. HEAFEY (STATE BAR NO. 153499)mheafey@orrick.comMONTE COOPER (STATE BAR NO. 196746)mcooper@orrick.comALAN M. CHEN (STATE BAR NO. 263126)alanchen@orrick.comORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP1000 Marsh RoadMenlo Park, CA 94025-1021Telephone: (650) 614-7400Facsimile: (650) 614-7401Attorneys for Plaintiff SMART MODULAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC.UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIASMART MODULAR TECHNOLOGIES,INC.,Plaintiff,v.NETLIST, INC.,Defendant.Case No.
COMPLAINT FORPATENTINFRINGEMENTJURYTRIAL DEMANDED
Case 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB Document 1 Filed 09/10/12 Page 1 of 25
 
- 1 -
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728Plaintiff SMART Modular Technologies, Inc. for its complaint against DefendantNetlist, Inc. hereby alleges as follows:
JURISDICTIONAND VENUE
1. This infringement action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35,United States Code. This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and1338(a).2. SMART is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 39870Eureka Drive, Newark, California 94560.3. On information and belief, Netlist is a Delaware corporation with its principalplace of business at 51 Discovery, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618. Netlist makes, imports,uses, offers to sell, and/or sells within the United States, including the state of California and the judicial district, products, including, but not limited to, computer memory subsystems.4. Upon information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Netlistbecause Netlist has conducted – and continues to conduct – business on a systematic andcontinuous basis within the United States, including the State of California and this judicialdistrict.5. Upon information and belief, Netlist has placed infringing products into the streamof commerce throughout the United States, including California, and those products have beenoffered for sale and/or sold and used within this judicial district.6. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
7. SMART is a technology leader in the design, development and deployment of computer memory products. As a core component of its business, SMART designs, manufacturesand sells computer memory subsystems.8. The memory subsystem technology at issue is a memory module with ranmultiplication capability, which enables,
inter alia
, a memory module to provide a given memorycapacity using greater numbers of lower-capacity, lower-cost Dynamic Random Access Memory / /
Case 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB Document 1 Filed 09/10/12 Page 2 of 25
 
- 2 -
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728(“DRAM”) devices, as opposed to using lower numbers of higher-capacity, higher-cost DRAMdevices that would otherwise be imposed by memory controller limitations.9. SMART is a leading innovator in memory technology and is the assignee andowner of all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No. 8,250,295 (the “‘295 Patent”)(Application No. 10/752,151 (the “‘151 application”)), entitled “Multi-Rank Memory ModuleThat Emulates A Memory Module Having A Different Number of Ranks.” The ‘295 Patent wasduly and legally issued on August 21, 2012, by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Acopy of the ‘295 Patent is attached hereto as
ExhibitA
.10. Netlist’s HyperCloud memory module products provide rank multiplicationcapability.
COUNT ONE(NETLIST’S INFRINGEMENT OFTHE ‘295 PATENT)
11. Each of the foregoing paragraphs 1-10 is incorporated by reference.12. On information and belief, Netlist manufactures, uses, offers for sale, sells,imports, or induces the same, products falling within the scope of one or more of the claims of the‘295 Patent, including, but not limited to, HyperCloud. As a result, Netlist has infringed, literallyor by equivalents, or both, continues to infringe, or threatens infringement of one or more of theclaims of the ‘295 Patent as defined by 35 U.S.C. § 271.13. SMART has suffered damage by reason of Netlist’s infringement and willcontinue to suffer additional damage until this Court enjoins the infringing conduct.14. On information and belief, Netlist is contributing to or inducing, or both, theinfringement of one or more claims of the ‘295 Patent by offering to sell and selling its systems,including, but not limited to, HyperCloud, to customers, buyers, sellers, users and others thatdirectly infringe the ‘295 Patent15. On information and belief, Netlist had knowledge of SMART’s ‘151 application.Netlist had knowledge that the ‘151 Application would issue as a patent, and the possibility thatits products infringe that patent, and has willfully, deliberately and intentionally infringed the‘295 Patent.
Case 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB Document 1 Filed 09/10/12 Page 3 of 25

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->