Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
WhatsApp v. Intercarrier Communications

WhatsApp v. Intercarrier Communications

Ratings: (0)|Views: 157|Likes:
Published by PriorSmart
Official Complaint for Declaratory Judgement in Civil Action No. None: WhatsApp Inc. v. Intercarrier Communications, LLC. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l97w for more info.
Official Complaint for Declaratory Judgement in Civil Action No. None: WhatsApp Inc. v. Intercarrier Communications, LLC. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l97w for more info.

More info:

Published by: PriorSmart on Sep 16, 2013
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

04/01/2014

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728 
 A
TTORNEYS
 A
T
L
 AW
 S
ILICON
V
 ALLEY
 
1
C
OMPLAINT FOR 
D
ECLARATORY
J
UDGMENT
 C
ASE
 N
O
.
 
5:13-
CV
-4272
MICHAEL A. LADRA, Bar. No. 64307mike.ladra@lw.comRICHARD G. FRENKEL, Bar No. 204133rick.frenkel@lw.comLISA K. NGUYEN, Bar No. 244280lisa.nguyen@lw.comSHONEY A.H. BLAKE, Bar. No. 264981shoney.blake@lw.comLATHAM & WATKINS LLP140 Scott DriveMenlo Park, CA 94025Telephone: (650) 328-4600Facsimile: (650) 463-2600KYLE A. VIRGIEN, Bar No. 278747kyle.virgien@lw.comLATHAM & WATKINS LLP505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000San Francisco, CA 94111-6538Telephone: (415) 391-0600Facsimile: (415) 395-8095Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIASAN JOSE DIVISIONWHATSAPP INC.Plaintiff,v.INTERCARRIER COMMUNICATIONS, LLCDefendants.
CASE NO. 5:13-CV-4272COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORYJUDGMENTDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
 Plaintiff WhatsApp Inc. (“WhatsApp”) hereby pleads the following claims for Declaratory Judgment against Defendant Intercarrier Communications, LLC (“ICC”), andalleges as follows:
THE PARTIES
1.
 
WhatsApp is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business at 303Bryant Street, Mountain View, California 94041.2.
 
On information and belief, ICC is an agent and alter ego of Acacia ResearchGroup LLC and Acacia Research Corporation. Per ICC’s allegations in an earlier litigation
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728 
 A
TTORNEYS
 A
T
L
 AW
 S
ILICON
V
 ALLEY
 
2
C
OMPLAINT FOR 
D
ECLARATORY
J
UDGMENT
 C
ASE
 N
O
.
 
5:13-
CV
-4272
 between the parties, ICC is a Texas corporation, having its principal place of business at 6136Frisco Square Boulevard, Suite 385, Frisco, Texas 75034. According to Texas public records,the sole member of ICC is Acacia Research Group LLC, a Texas corporation having its principal place of business at the same address as ICC. Acacia Research Group LLC is itself a subsidiaryof Acacia Research Corporation, a public company comprised of numerous operatingsubsidiaries that are in the business of monetizing patents. Acacia Research Corporation is aDelaware corporation, with its principal place of business at 500 Newport Center Drive, 7thFloor, Newport Beach, California 92660.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.
 
The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over WhatsApp’s declaratory judgmentclaims relating to patent invalidity and non-infringement 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a), 2201 and2202.4.
 
On October 26, 2012, ICC sued WhatsApp for infringing United States Patent No.6,985,748 (“the ’748 patent”) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia by “using, and/or providing and causing to be used products that provide messagingservices,” including WhatsApp Messenger. ICC purported to be the owner of all right, title, andinterest in the ’748 patent, including the right to assert all causes of action arising under that patent and the right to any remedies for infringement of it.5.
 
On January 25, 2013, WhatsApp moved to dismiss ICC’s Eastern District of Virginia complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer the action tothe United States District Court for the Northern District of California.6.
 
On February 8, 2013, ICC opposed WhatsApp’s motion to dismiss. In opposingthe section on transfer to the Northern District of California, ICC admitted that the patentinfringement action between ICC and WhatsApp could have been brought in the NorthernDistrict of California.7.
 
ICC also sued numerous other companies on the ’748 patent in the EasternDistrict of Virginia, including Interop Technologies, LLC (“Interop”) and Glympse, Inc.(“Glympse”).
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728 
 A
TTORNEYS
 A
T
L
 AW
 S
ILICON
V
 ALLEY
 
3
C
OMPLAINT FOR 
D
ECLARATORY
J
UDGMENT
 C
ASE
 N
O
.
 
5:13-
CV
-4272
8.
 
On April 18, 2013, ICC stipulated to have its case against Interop transferred tothe United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, where Interop’s principal place of business is purportedly located.9.
 
On August 12, 2013, ICC’s case against Glympse was transferred to the UnitedStates District Court for the Western District of Washington, where Glympse’s principal place of  business is purportedly located.10.
 
On September 13, 2013, the Eastern District of Virginia issued an order dismissing ICC’s complaint against WhatsApp for lack of personal jurisdiction over WhatsAppin Virginia.11.
 
WhatsApp denies that the ’748 patent is infringed through the making, using,offering for sale, or sale of WhatsApp Messenger or any other WhatsApp product or service.WhatsApp further contends that the ’748 patent is invalid. On information and belief, ICCcontends that the claims of the ’748 patent are valid and continues to contend that WhatsApp’s products infringe the ’748 patent. Under all the circumstances, ICC’s infringement allegationsand related actions threaten actual and imminent injury to WhatsApp that can be redressed by judicial relief and warrants the issuance of a declaratory judgment. An actual and justiciablecontroversy exists between WhatsApp and ICC with respect to the ’748 patent.12.
 
On information and belief, ICC has taken intentional and purposeful steps toenforce the ’748 patent against residents of this judicial district including by suing WhatsAppand other companies with principal places of business or operations in this judicial district for infringement of the ’748 patent.13.
 
On information and belief, ICC is an agent and alter ego of Acacia ResearchGroup LLC and Acacia Research Corporation (“Acacia”), the latter of which has a principal place of business in California. On information and belief, Acacia is in the business of monetizing patents and its standard business model is to create shell entities to hold patents andassert them against operating entities such as WhatsApp. On information and belief, Acaciaoften chooses to house these shell entities in locations in the United States in an attempt togenerate jurisdiction in a particular location.

You're Reading a Free Preview

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