IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. ROBOCAST, INC., Defendant. C. A. No. ______________________

COMPLAINT Plaintiff Microsoft Corporation, by and through the undersigned attorneys, files this Complaint for patent infringement against Defendant Robocast, Inc., requesting damages and other relief and alleging as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Microsoft Corporation (hereinafter Microsoft) is a Washington

corporation, with its principal place of business located at One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052. 2. On information and belief, Defendant Robocast, Inc. (hereinafter Robocast) is a

Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 90 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10003. On information and belief, Robocasts registered agent for service in Delaware is Delaware Corporation Organizers, Inc., 1201 North Market Street, 18th Floor, P.O. Box 1347, Wilmington, DE 19808.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the

United States, Title 35 of the United States Codes. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. 4. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Robocast because Robocast is a

Delaware corporation and it has voluntarily invoked this Courts jurisdiction by filing an earlier suit against Microsoft in this Court (Robocast Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, 1:10-cv-1055). Robocast has purposefully directed its activities at residents of Delaware, including by touting its infringing websites (e.g., http://www.robocast.com and http://beta.robocast.com) during the course of the aforementioned litigation. 5. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400

because Robocast is a Delaware corporation, it already has filed the earlier suit in this Court, and it has purposefully directed its activities relating to its infringing website in this Court. PATENT-IN-SUIT 6. Microsoft is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in and to

United States Patent No. 6,632,248 (the 248 patent), entitled Customization of Network Documents by Accessing Customization Information on A Server Computer Using Uniquie [sic] User Identifiers. The 248 patent was issued on October 14, 2003, from U.S. Patent Application No. 08/761,566, which was filed on December 6, 1996. A true and correct copy of the 248 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 7. The 248 patent generally discloses methods and apparatuses for providing

customized information to a user who accesses network documents via a computer network.

This customization process significantly improves the web-surfing experience by providing computer users with selective access to a wide variety of network contents. 8. Microsoft has incurred substantial effort and expenses to develop the technologies

leading to the 248 patent. CLAIM FOR INFRINGEMENT OF THE 248 PATENT 9. Microsoft incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-8. As described

below, Robocast has infringed and continues to infringe the 248 patent. 10. Robocast has infringed and continues to infringe the 248 patent under 35 U.S.C.

271(a), either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling within the United States or importing into the United States, web-based services via operation of its websites (e.g., http://www.robocast.com and http://beta.robocast.com) and related software, including but not limited to, Robocaster, RoboGuide, RoboMobile, RoboPublisher, RoboSearch, RoboStats, RoboSurf, RoboShow, Tricon, and Play The Web. Robocasts websites and related software have infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the 248 patent by at least obtaining and storing network document customization information selected by one or more computer users. 11. As a result of Robocasts past and continued unlawful infringement of the 248

patent, Microsoft has suffered and will continue to suffer damages. Microsoft is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for Robocasts infringement in an amount that will be ascertained at trial, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Microsoft respectfully requests the following relief: (1) A judgment that Robocast has directly infringed the 248 patent;

(2)

Awarding Microsoft damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, prejudgment interest and post-judgment interest as allowed by law, costs, and all other damages permitted under 35 U.S.C. 284;

(3)

An accounting for any infringing sales not presented at trial and awarding Microsoft additional damages for any such infringing sales;

(4)

Declaring that this case is an exceptional one under 35 U.S.C. 285, and awarding Microsoft its reasonable attorneys fees;

(5)

Awarding Microsoft a compulsory ongoing licensing fee to compensate for any future acts of infringement from Robocast; and

(6)

Such further, necessary and proper relief as this Court may deem just and reasonable.

Dated: February 25, 2013

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. By: /s/ Douglas E. McCann Douglas E. McCann (#3852) 222 Delaware Avenue, 17th Floor P.O. Box 1114 Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 652-5070 Facsimile: (302) 652-0607 Email: dmccann@fr.com Steven C. Carlson FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 839-5197 Facsimile: (650) 839-8071 Email: steven.carlson@fr.com Counsel for Plaintiff MICROSOFT CORPORATION