Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:37

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 2 of 26 Page ID #:38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Plaintiff Summers Patent Holdings, LLC, by and through its attorneys, hereby alleges for its complaint against defendant Clarion Corporation of America as follows: INTRODUCTION This complaint is based upon defendant Clarion Corporation of Americas (Defendant or Clarion) unauthorized making, importing, using, selling and offering to sell in the United States and abroad products that infringe United States Patent No. 5,971,799 (the 799 patent), and inducing others to do so. THE PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Summers Patent Holdings, LLC (SPH or Plaintiff) is a

limited liability corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. 2. SPH is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that defendant

Clarion Corporation of America is now, and at all times herein mentioned was, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at 6200 Gateway Drive, Cypress, California 90630. 3. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate

or otherwise, of the defendants named herein as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff and Plaintiff therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to show their true names and capacities when ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that each of such fictitiously named defendants is responsible in some manner for the matters herein alleged. (All defendants are collectively referred to herein as Defendants). 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all

times mentioned herein Defendants were the partners, joint venturers, affiliates, agents, servants, employees, landlords, lessees, or alter ego of their co-Defendants and, in doing the things hereinafter mentioned, were acting within the scope of their
-1COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 3 of 26 Page ID #:39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

authority as such with the permission and consent of their co-Defendants and are jointly responsible for the wrongful conduct alleged herein. JURISDICTION 5. This is an action for patent infringement that arises under, among other

things, the United States patent laws, 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq., including, inter alia, 271. Subject matter jurisdiction is therefore based upon 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a), providing for federal question jurisdiction of patent infringement actions and exclusive jurisdiction of patent infringement actions in the U.S. district courts. 6. This Court has both general and specific personal jurisdiction over

defendant Clarion because Clarion has systematic and continuous contacts with the State of California and because the claims alleges herein also stem from Clarions contacts with the State of California. On information and belief, Clarion is registered with the California Secretary of State to do business in California, is organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and the acts of infringement alleged herein occurred at least in part within California and this judicial district. Clarion has purposefully availed itself of the laws of the State of California by making, importing, using, selling, offering to sell, throughout California and in this judicial district products that infringe the 799 patent, and inducing others to do so. VENUE 7. SPH is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that this Court is

the appropriate venue for this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)-(d) and 1400(b) because the acts of patent infringement alleged herein were engaged in within this judicial district and because Clarion resides within this judicial district. FACTS 8. Plaintiff SPH is a private technology company engaged in the business

of, among other things, monetizing technology and its federally protected intellectual property, which SPH and/or its principals have developed and/or
-2COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 4 of 26 Page ID #:40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

acquired during their many years in various technology industries. The principals of SPH have worked approximately 36 years in the mobile electronics industry, developing and assisting in the development of many innovative ideas over that time, many of which have been patented and/or copyrighted. SPH and/or its principals have taken great care to avoid actual or possible infringement of others inventions by, among other things, duly purchasing or acquiring patents and/or licenses where necessary to ensure that their commercial activity fully complies with applicable patent and other intellectual property law. SPH believes that others in the industry likewise bear a responsibility to ensure that their own activities do not infringe SPHs patents or other intellectual property rights. 9. Among other intellectual property, SPH owns U.S. Patent No. 5,971,799 (the 799 Patent). On October 26, 1999, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and lawfully issued the 799 Patent, titled Y-Shaped Harness for the Interconnection Between a Vehicle Radio, Vehicle Harness and Add-On Electronic Device for the novel and unobvious invention of SPHs YShaped Harness. A true and correct copy of the 799 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 10. The 799 Patent was originally assigned to Mr. George Swade, and thereafter was assigned to Precision Interface Electronics, Inc. (SPHs principals previous company) on December 3, 2003. The patent was then assigned from Precision Interface Electronics, Inc. to plaintiff SPH on March 11, 2013. 11. Patent. 12. The technology at issue in the 799 Patent, SPHs Y-Shaped Harness, SPH is the current owner of all rights, title and interest in the 799

has been used extensively, and its novel and nonobvious design is demonstrated by the fact that it has already been nonexclusively licensed without litigation. 13. SPH is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that defendant
-3COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Clarion designs, manufactures, distributes, and uses devices which embody and

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 5 of 26 Page ID #:41

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

infringe SPHs 799 patent throughout the country, including the State of California and this judicial district, and induces others to do so. Among other things, SPH has obtained and studied installation manuals for infringing devices, including Clarion Model Nos. PSW-GM-SU-B/T/G/R, PSWJPGC, PSWFSU, and PSWFRGR. 14. SPH is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that with knowledge of and in direct contravention of SPHs rights to the 799 Patent, defendant Clarion promoted, sold, offered to sell, caused others to sell, and caused others to use infringing products throughout the United States and abroad, including in the State of California and in this judicial district. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Against All Defendants) INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. US 5,971,799 (35 U.S.C. 271) 15. SPH hereby incorporates by reference each of the preceding Defendant Clarion has infringed the 799 Patent by importing,

paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 16.

manufacturing, using, selling, offering for sale, and causing others to sell and use within the United States and abroad, including in the State of California and in this judicial district, Y-Harnesses that fall within the scope of the 799 Patent and embody and infringe the technology described therein. On information and belief, Defendant will continue to infringe the 799 Patent in this manner unless enjoined by this Court. 17. Even if Clarions products do not literally infringe the 799 Patent, they are substantially similar to the inventions claimed in the 799 Patent such that, under the doctrine of equivalents, they infringe. 18. SPH is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant has infringed the 799 Patent willfully, with full knowledge of SPHs rights to the 799
-4COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 6 of 26 Page ID #:42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Patent, and has unjustly profited and continues to unjustly profit from its infringement in an amount yet to be determined. 19. SPH is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant has

willfully contributed to the infringement of and willfully induced others to infringe the 799 Patent by, for example, causing others to use and sell Y-Harnesses that fall within the scope of the 799 Patent, and will continue to contribute to the infringement of and induce others to infringe the 799 Patent unless enjoined by this Court. 20. Specifically, claims 1 through 10 of the 799 Patent are primarily

directed to a harness which interconnects a powered subwoofer, a car radio, and the cars main electrical harness using male/female plug connections between the three devices. This invention allows an aftermarket powered subwoofer to be connected to a power source and the radio without the splicing of wires, which was unavailable prior to the 799 Patent. 21. On information and belief, and based on SPHs investigation and pre-

filing analysis, defendant Clarion manufactures, sells, and induces others to use, the technology embodied and covered by the claims of the 799 Patent as described above. Among other things, Clarions product user manuals clearly instruct purchasers of Clarion powered subwoofers on the installation procedures of the products using a Clarion T-Harness. The Clarion T-Harness has male/female plugs that attach to the vehicles main electrical harness, the vehicles radio, and the Clarion powered subwoofer in the manner described by the 799 Patents claims, and is therefore infringing. 22. As a direct and proximate result of the infringing activities of

Defendant, SPH has been, is being and, unless the Court enjoins such activities, will continue to be, damaged. Consequently, SPH is entitled to compensation for its damages from Defendants in an amount that cannot be presently quantified but will be ascertained at trial.
-5COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 7 of 26 Page ID #:43

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, SPH prays for relief and judgment from this Court: (a) For an order declaring that the 799 Patent owned by SPH was duly

and legally issued and is valid and enforceable; (b) For an order declaring that Defendant has directly infringed, infringed

under the doctrine of equivalents, contributorily infringed, and/or induced the infringement of one or more claims of the 799 Patent; (c) For an order declaring that Defendant has willfully infringed one or more claims of the 799 Patent; (d) For an order, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283, enjoining Defendant, its

officers, directors, employees, successors and assigns, agents, attorneys, subsidiaries, parent corporations, and all persons in active concert with Defendant, preliminarily and permanently, from making, using, selling, offering to sell, exporting, or inducing others to do so, products that infringe the 799 Patent; (e) That Defendant be required to prepare and deliver to the Court, or to

such agents as the Court may designate, a complete list of entities to whom Defendant distributed or sold Defendant products that infringe the 799 Patent and that Defendant be required to serve a copy of such list on SPHs attorneys; (f) For damages, together with prejudgment interest, based on Defendants infringement of the 799 Patent, such damages being trebled pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 for the willful, wanton, and deliberate nature of such infringement, in an amount to be proven at trial;
/// /// /// /// /// /// -6COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 8 of 26 Page ID #:44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and

(g)

For costs and reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;

(h) Dated:

For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. August 12, 2013 WUCETICH & KOROVILAS LLP JASON M. WUCETICH DIMITRIOS V. KOROVILAS BYERS IP LAW & CONSULTING STEPHEN D. BYERS

By: JASON M. WUCETICH Attorneys for Plaintiff SUMMERS PATENT HOLDINGS, LLC

-7COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 9 of 26 Page ID #:45

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Pursuant to the Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury against defendants on all claims so triable. Dated: August 12, 2013 WUCETICH & KOROVILAS LLP JASON M. WUCETICH DIMITRIOS V. KOROVILAS BYERS IP LAW & CONSULTING STEPHEN D. BYERS

By: JASON M. WUCETICH Attorneys for Plaintiff SUMMERS PATENT HOLDINGS, LLC

-8COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 10 of 26 Page ID #:46

EXHIBIT A

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 11 of 26 Page ID #:47

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 009

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 12 of 26 Page ID #:48

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 010

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 13 of 26 Page ID #:49

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 011

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 14 of 26 Page ID #:50

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 012

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 15 of 26 Page ID #:51

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 013

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 16 of 26 Page ID #:52

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 014

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 17 of 26 Page ID #:53

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 015

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 18 of 26 Page ID #:54

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 016

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 19 of 26 Page ID #:55

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 017

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 20 of 26 Page ID #:56

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 018

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 21 of 26 Page ID #:57

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 019

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 22 of 26 Page ID #:58

EXHIBIT A, PAGE 020

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 23 of 26 Page ID #:59

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 24 of 26 Page ID #:60

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 25 of 26 Page ID #:61

Case 2:13-cv-05891-DDP-SH Document 1 Filed 08/13/13 Page 26 of 26 Page ID #:62