Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 164

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC, ) ) ) Plaintiff and Counterclaim ) Defendant, ) v. ) ) RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and ) RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION, ) ) Defendants and Counterclaim ) Plaintiffs. ) Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00526-JRG

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

JOINT ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANTS RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED AND RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION Defendant Research In Motion Limited (now known as BlackBerry Limited), and Defendant Research In Motion Corporation (now known as BlackBerry Corporation) (collectively, “BlackBerry”) answer the Complaint of plaintiff Innovative Display Technologies LLC (“IDT”), and counterclaim as follows: THE PARTIES 1. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 1 of IDT’s Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 2. BlackBerry admits the allegations in paragraph 2 the Complaint as they pertain to

Research In Motion Limited. On July 9, 2013, Research In Motion Limited changed its name to BlackBerry Limited. 3. BlackBerry admits the allegations in paragraph 3 of the Complaint as they pertain

to Research In Motion Corporation. On July 9, 2013, Research In Motion Corporation changed its name to BlackBerry Corporation. 4. BlackBerry admits that it is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.

A/75734417.2

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 165

BlackBerry denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. BlackBerry admits that the Complaint purports to state an action for patent

infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq., including 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, 283, 284, and 285. BlackBerry admits this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a). 6. BlackBerry admits that BlackBerry Limited (referenced as “RIM Canada” in the

Complaint) is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court. Certain allegations of paragraph 6 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required. BlackBerry otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 6 of the Complaint. 7. BlackBerry admits that its products are shipped, distributed, offered for sale, and

or sold in the United States and this District. BlackBerry denies that BlackBerry Limited has committed acts of infringement in this District or otherwise. BlackBerry denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 7. 8. BlackBerry admits that BlackBerry Corporation (referenced as “RIM USA” in the

Complaint) is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court , and maintains a headquarters at 5000 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039. Certain allegations of paragraph 8 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required. BlackBerry otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 8 of the Complaint. 9. BlackBerry admits that its products are shipped, distributed, offered for sale, and

or sold in the United States and this District. BlackBerry denies that BlackBerry Corporation has committed acts of infringement in this District or otherwise. BlackBerry denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 9. 10. BlackBerry admits that venue is proper in this Court , but denies that the Eastern

District of Texas is an appropriate forum for this action, in light of factors including those set out in 35 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and similar provisions. BlackBerry admits that it is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District. BlackBerry admits that it does business in this District. Certain
A/75734417.2

2

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 166

allegations of paragraph 10 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required. BlackBerry otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 10 of the Complaint. BACKGROUND 11. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 6,755,547 (“the ‘547 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists June 29, 2004 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit A to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘547 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 11 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 12. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 7,300,194 (“the ‘194 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists November 27, 2007 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit B to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘194 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 12 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 13. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 7,384,177 (“the ‘177 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists June 10, 2008 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit C to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘177 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 13 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 14. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 7,404,660 (“the ‘660 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists July 29, 2008 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit D to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘660 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 14 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same.
A/75734417.2

3

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 167

15.

BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 7,434,974 (“the ‘974 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists October 14, 2008 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit E to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘974 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 15 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 16. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 7,537,370 (“the ‘370 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists May 26, 2009 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit F to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘370 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 16 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 17. BlackBerry admits that United States Patent No. 8,215,816 (“the ‘816 Patent”) is

entitled “Light Emitting Panel Assemblies,” lists July 10, 2012 as the issue date, and identifies Jeffery R. Parker as an inventor. BlackBerry also admits that Exhibit G to the Complaint appears to be a copy of the ‘816 Patent. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 17 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 18. BlackBerry admits that Jeffery R. Parker is identified as the inventor of the ‘547

Patent, the ‘194 Patent, the ‘177 Patent, the ‘660 Patent, the ‘974 Patent, the ‘370 Patent, and the ‘816 Patent (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”). BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegation in paragraph 18 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 19. 20. 21. 22. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 19. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 20. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 21. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 22. 4

A/75734417.2

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 168

COUNT I (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 6,755,547) 23. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 22 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 24. 25. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 24. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 25 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 26. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 26 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 27. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 28. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 29. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 30. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 31. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 32. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 33. COUNT II (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,300,194) 34. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 33 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 35. 36. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 35. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 36 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 37. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is 5

A/75734417.2

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 169

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 37 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 38. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 39. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 40. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 41. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 42. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 43. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 44. COUNT III (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,384,177) 45. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 44 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 46. 47. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 46. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 47 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 48. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 48 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55.
A/75734417.2

BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 49. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 50. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 51. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 52. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 53. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 54. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 55. 6

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 170

COUNT IV (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,404,660) 56. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 55 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 57. 58. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 57. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 58 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 59. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 59 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 60. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 61. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 62. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 63. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 64. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 65. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 66. COUNT V (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,434,974) 67. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 66 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 68. 69. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 68. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 69 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 70. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is 7

A/75734417.2

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 171

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 70 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 71. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 72. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 73. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 74. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 75. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 76. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 77. COUNT VI (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,537,370) 78. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 77 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 79. 80. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 79. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 80 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 81. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement at any time prior to the filing of the Complaint. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 81 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88.
A/75734417.2

BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 82. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 83. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 84. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 85. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 86. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 87. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 88. 8

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 172

COUNT VII (Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 8,215,816) 89. BlackBerry incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 88 of

the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 90. 91. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 90. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations in paragraph 91 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 92. BlackBerry denies that IDT provided BlackBerry with actual or constructive

notice of its alleged infringement. BlackBerry is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 92 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 93. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 94. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 95. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 96. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 97. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 98. BlackBerry denies the allegations in paragraph 99. CONCLUSION 100. BlackBerry denies any wrongful acts. BlackBerry denies that IDT is entitled to

any relief, and specifically denies that IDT is entitled to the damages requested in paragraph 100. 101. BlackBerry denies that the circumstances of this dispute are exceptional pursuant

to 35 U.S.C. § 285. BlackBerry denies that IDT is entitled to any relief, and specifically denies that IDT is entitled to the relief requested in paragraph 101. JURY DEMAND 102. No response required.

A/75734417.2

9

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 10 of 17 PageID #: 173

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 103. BlackBerry denies that IDT is entitled to any of the relief, including the relief

requested in its Prayer for Relief. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES BlackBerry alleges and asserts the following affirmative defenses in response to the allegations in the Complaint: 104. BlackBerry repeats and incorporates by reference the responses to the allegations

of paragraphs 1-103 of the Complaint as set forth above as if those responses have been fully set forth herein. BlackBerry asserts the following affirmative defenses listed below. BlackBerry reserves the right to add additional defenses, including but not limited to allegations of inequitable conduct, consistent with facts discovered in the case. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 105. BlackBerry has not directly or indirectly infringed any valid and enforceable

claim of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 106. Each claim of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents is invalid

for failure to comply with one or more of the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §1, et seq., including, but not limited to, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 107. IDT is not entitled to injunctive relief, because, inter alia, any injury to IDT is not

irreparable, and IDT has an adequate remedy at law. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 108. Under 35 U.S.C. § 286, IDT’s claims are barred in whole or in part for all events

occurring more than six years prior to the filing of the Complaint.

A/75734417.2

10

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 11 of 17 PageID #: 174

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 109. IDT is prohibited from recovering damages for activities alleged to have occurred

before IDT complies with 35 U.S.C. § 287. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 110. To the extent that certain products accused of infringing the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177,

‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents are or were used by and/or manufactured for the United States Government, IDT’s claims against BlackBerry with respect to such products are barred under 28 U.S.C. § 1498. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 111. BlackBerry is informed and believes that Plaintiff’s infringement claims against

BlackBerry regarding the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents are barred and/or the patents-in-suit are unenforceable against BlackBerry under one or more of the doctrines of laches, prosecution laches, waiver, estoppel, and/or acquiescence. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 112. BlackBerry hereby reserves the right to assert additional defenses and/or

counterclaims if such defenses or counterclaims are discovered during the course of this litigation. WHEREFORE, BlackBerry asks this Court to A. B. C. dismiss IDT’s action against BlackBerry; enter judgment that IDT take nothing on its claims against BlackBerry; find that BlackBerry is the prevailing party, and that it is entitled to relief under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because this case is exceptional; D. award BlackBerry its attorney’s fees and costs of defending this action; and E. order such other and further relief as to which BlackBerry may be entitled.

A/75734417.2

11

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 12 of 17 PageID #: 175

COUNTERCLAIMS Research in Motion Limited (now known as BlackBerry Limited), and Research in Motion Corporation (now known as BlackBerry Corporation) (collectively, “BlackBerry”) asserts the following counterclaims against Innovative Display Technologies LLC (“IDT”): 113. BlackBerry incorporates by reference all of the allegations of the preceding

Answer from paragraphs 1 to 112. NATURE OF THE ACTION 114. This is an action for a judgment declaring the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370,

and ‘816 Patents invalid and not infringed. THE PARTIES 115. BlackBerry Limited is an Ontario company with its principal place of business at

295 Phillip Street, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3W8. 116. BlackBerry Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business at 5000 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039. 117. According to its Complaint, IDT is a Texas limited liability company with its

principal place of business located at 2400 Dallas Parkway, Suite 200, Plano, TX 75093. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 118. BlackBerry’s counterclaims arise under the United States patent laws, 35 U.S.C.

§ 101 et seq. and seek declaratory relief for which this Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338, 2201, and 2202. Venue is based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c). 119. An actual justiciable controversy exists under the Declaratory Judgment Act with

respect to the alleged infringement and validity of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents. 120. The Court has personal jurisdiction over IDT by virtue of its filing of this action.

A/75734417.2

12

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 13 of 17 PageID #: 176

121.

To the extent that this action remains in this District, venue is appropriate for

BlackBerry’s counterclaims because IDT has consented to the propriety of venue in this Court by filing its claims for patent infringement in this Court. FIRST COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATION OF NON-INFRINGEMENT 122. BlackBerry re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs

113 through 121 as if fully set forth herein. 123. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between BlackBerry and IDT with

respect to the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents. Absent a declaration of noninfringement, IDT will continue to wrongfully assert the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents against BlackBerry, and thereby cause BlackBerry irreparable injury and damage. 124. BlackBerry does not infringe any valid and enforceable claim of the ‘547, ‘194,

‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and BlackBerry has not actively induced or contributed to the infringement of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents; and, BlackBerry is entitled to a declaration to that effect. SECOND COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATION OF INVALIDITY 125. BlackBerry re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs

113 through 124 as if fully set forth herein. 126. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between BlackBerry and IDT with

respect to the validity of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents. Absent a declaration of invalidity, IDT will continue to wrongfully assert the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents against BlackBerry, and thereby cause BlackBerry injury and damage. 127. The ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents are invalid under the

provisions of Title 35, United States Code, including, but not limited to, one or more of Sections 101, 102, 103, and/or 112; and, BlackBerry is entitled to a declaration to that effect.

A/75734417.2

13

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 14 of 17 PageID #: 177

THIRD COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATION OF NON-WILLFULNESS 128. BlackBerry re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs

113 through 127 as if fully set forth herein. 129. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between BlackBerry and IDT with

respect to the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents. Absent a declaration of nonwillful infringement, IDT will continue to wrongfully assert that BlackBerry willfully infringed the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents and seek treble damages for willful infringement. 130. BlackBerry has not and does not willfully infringe any valid and enforceable

claim of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and BlackBerry has not actively induced or contributed to the willful infringement of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents; and, BlackBerry is entitled to a declaration to that effect. JURY DEMAND 131. BlackBerry demands a trial by jury on all issues presented in this action. PRAYER WHEREFORE, having fully answered and counterclaimed, BlackBerry respectfully prays that the Court: A. B. C. Dismiss the Complaint with prejudice; Enter judgment in BlackBerry’s favor on all claims and counterclaims; Declare that BlackBerry does not infringe or contribute to or induce infringement of the claims of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents; D. Declare that the claims of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents are invalid; E.
A/75734417.2

Declare that BlackBerry does not willfully infringe or contribute to or induce 14

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 15 of 17 PageID #: 178

willful infringement of the claims of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents; F. Permanently enjoy IDT, its parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and assigns, and anyone acting in concert therewith or on its behalf, from litigating any action in any other court against BlackBerry or any parent, affiliate, or subsidiary of BlackBerry, or its respective officers, agents, employees, successor, assigns, and customers for infringement of the ‘547, ‘194, ‘177, ‘660, ‘974, ‘370, and ‘816 Patents on the same factual bases; Award BlackBerry its attorneys’ fees and costs of litigating this action; G. Find this case to be exceptional and award BlackBerry its reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. § 285 or otherwise; H. Award BlackBerry any further general or special relief to which BlackBerry is entitled; and I. Provide such other and further general or special relief to BlackBerry that this Court deems just and proper. BlackBerry reserves the right to amend its Answer and Counterclaims to raise additional affirmative defenses and counterclaims as warranted by subsequent investigation and/or analysis.

A/75734417.2

15

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 16 of 17 PageID #: 179

DATED: September 23, 2013

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John A. Polito (by permission of Susan Baker Manning E. Leon Carter Texas Bar No. 03914300 lcarter@carterstafford.com John S. Torkelson Texas Bar No. 00795154 jtorkelson@carterstafford.com Joshua Bennett Texas Bar No. 24059444 jbennett@carterstafford.com CARTER STAFFORD ARNETT HAMADA & MOCKLER, PLLC 8150 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1950 Dallas, Texas 75206 Telephone: 214.550.8188 Facsimile: 214.550.8185 Susan Baker Manning (lead counsel, pro hac vice application pending) susan.manning@bingham.com John A. Polito john.polito@bingham.com Monica A. Hernandez (pro hac vice application pending) monica.hernandez@bingham.com BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 2020 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006-1806, U.S.A. Telephone: 202.373.6000 Facsimile: 202.373.6001 Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants Research In Motion Limited and Research In Motion Corporation

A/75734417.2

16

Case 2:13-cv-00526-JRG Document 20 Filed 09/23/13 Page 17 of 17 PageID #: 180

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on September 23, 2013, the foregoing document was served electronically on all counsel of record who have consented to electronic service pursuant to Local Rule CV-5(a)((3)(A). Any other counsel of record were served by first class mail.

/s/ John A. Polito

A/75734417.2

17