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

Steven W. Ritcheson, Esq. (SBN 174062) swritcheson@hgdlawfirm.com HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 9800 D Topanga Canyon Blvd. #347 Chatsworth, California 91311 Telephone: (818) 882-1030 Facsimile: (818) 337-0383 Attorney for Plaintiff, Newthink, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

NEWTHINK, LLC, Plaintiff, v. ADVANTECH CORP., Defendant.

Case No. 2:13-cv-08629 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Newthink, LLC (Plaintiff or Newthink), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this Complaint for Patent Infringement against Defendant Advantech Corp., (Defendant or Advantech) as follows:

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

NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is a patent infringement action to stop Defendants infringement

of Plaintiffs United States Patent No. 6,630,939 entitled Portable, Read-Only Electronic Display Unit (hereinafter, the 939 Patent or the Patent-in-Suit), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

PARTIES 2. Plaintiff is a limited liability company organized and existing under

the laws of the state of Florida. Plaintiff maintains its principal place of business at 20 Island Avenue, Suite 911, Miami (Miami-Dade County), Florida, 33139. Plaintiff is the owner of the Patent-in-Suit, and possesses all rights thereto, including the exclusive right to exclude the Defendant from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing in this district and elsewhere into the United States the patented invention(s) of the Patent-in-Suit, the right to license the Patent-in-Suit, and to sue the Defendant for infringement and recover past damages. 3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Advantech is a corporation

organized and existing under the laws of the State of California since August 25, 1987 with its with its principal place of business located at 380 Fairview Way, Milpitas (Santa Clara County), California, 95035 and may be served through its registered agent, Lucia Wang, at the same address.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35

U.S.C. 1 et seq., including 35 U.S.C. 271, 281-285. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case for patent infringement under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a).

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |2

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

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

5.

Upon information and belief, Defendant has transacted business and

committed acts of infringement within the State of California, and more importantly, within this District, and is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because, upon

information and belief: Defendant has minimum contacts within the State of California and the Central District of California; Defendant has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the State of California and in the Central District of California; Defendant has sought the protection and benefits of the laws of the State of California; Defendant regularly conducts business within the State of California and within the Central District of California; and Plaintiffs causes of action arise directly from Defendants business contacts and other activities in the State of California and in the Central District of California. 6. Upon information and belief, Defendant has made, used, offered for

sale, imported, sold, or advertised, and continued to make, use, offer to sell, import, sell, or advertise (including providing an interactive web page) in this district and elsewhere in the United States its products and services that infringe one or more claims of the Patent-in-Suit. More specifically, Defendant, directly and/or through intermediaries, makes, uses, sells, ships, distributes, offers for sale, or advertises its products and services in the United States, the State of California, and the Central District of California. Upon information and belief, Defendant has committed patent infringement directly in the State of California and in the Central District of California. Upon information and belief, Defendant solicits customers in the State of California and in the Central District of California. Upon information and belief, Defendant has many paying customers who are residents of the State of California and in the Central District of California, and who each use Defendants products and services in the State of California and in the Central District of California.

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |3

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

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

7. 1400(b).

Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 and

BACKGROUND 8. On October 7, 2003, the United States Patent and Trademark Office

duly and legally issued the 939 Patent to the inventor Bryan K. Mills, who assigned all rights, title and interest in and to the 939 patent to Newthink, giving Newthink the right to exclude the Defendant from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing in this district and elsewhere in the United States the patented invention(s) of the 939 Patent, and the right to sublicense the 939 Patent, collect damages and initiate lawsuits against the Defendant. The 939 Patent is in full force and effect. Plaintiff is the legal owner of the 939 Patent and possesses all rights of recovery under the 939 patent. 9. On information and belief, Defendant operates, advertises,

implements, and controls its website, www.advantech.com to advertise, to sell, and to support its products and services. 10. On information and belief, Defendant offers its customers products

that infringe the Patent-in-Suit, including but not limited to: C10L, PWS-770, and S10A (hereinafter, the Accused Products).

COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,630,939 11. Newthink re-alleges and incorporates herein paragraphs 1 through 10

as though they were fully set forth herein. 12. Newthink is informed and believes that Defendant has infringed and

continues to infringe one or more claims of the 939 Patent, either literally or under the Doctrine of Equivalents, by making, using, importing, providing, offering to sell, advertising and/or selling (directly or through intermediaries), in this District

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |4

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

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 elsewhere in the United States, infringing products comprising thin, flat, selfcontained display units. Specifically, upon information and belief, Defendant

makes, uses, sells, distributes and otherwise provides to its customers in this District and throughout the United States thin, flat, self-contained display units including, but not limited to, the Accused Products listed above and associated hardware and software. Upon information and belief, said products are available for sale through Defendants website. Upon information and belief, said products infringe one or more claims of the 939 Patent, including Claim 1. 13. Defendants aforesaid activities have been without authority and/or

license from Plaintiff. 14. Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendant the damages sustained

by Plaintiff as a result of Defendants wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. 284. 15. Defendants infringement of Plaintiffs exclusive rights under the 939

patent will continue to damage Plaintiff, causing irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.

JURY DEMAND 16. Plaintiff requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court find in its favor and against Defendant, and that the Court grant Plaintiff the following relief:

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |5

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

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

A.

An adjudication that the Defendant has directly infringed one or more claims of the 939 Patent, either literally or under the Doctrine of Equivalents;

B.

An award to Plaintiff of damages adequate to compensate Plaintiff for the Defendants acts of infringement together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;

C.

An award of Plaintiffs costs of suit and reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285 due to the exceptional nature of this case, or as otherwise permitted by law with respect to the Defendant;

D.

A grant of permanent injunction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283, enjoining the Defendant from further acts of infringement; and

E.

Any further relief that this Court deems just and proper.

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |6

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

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

Respectfully submitted, Dated: November 22, 2013

s/ Steven W. Ritcheson Steven W. Ritcheson, Esq. (SBN 174062) swritcheson@hgdlawfirm.com HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 9800 D Topanga Canyon Blvd. #347 Chatsworth, California 91311 Telephone: (818) 882-1030 Facsimile: (818) 337-0383 Attorney for Plaintiff, Newthink, LLC

C.D. CAL: NEWTHINK, LLC V. ADVANTECH CORP.

PAGE |7

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT