Free Answer to Counterclaim - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00190-SLR Document 116 Filed O4/30/2008 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
SIEMENS MEDICAL SOLUTIONS USA, ) n
INC., ) "
· Plaintiff g
v. g C.A. No. 07-190 (SLR)
SAINT-GOBAIN CERAMICS & g
PLASTICS, INC., )
Defendant. g
REPLY OF SIEMENS MEDICAL T0 ANSWER TO AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM ON
BEHALF OF SAINT-GOBAIN CERAMICS & PLASTICS, INC.
I I Plaintiff Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. ("Siemens Medical”) for its Reply
to the Answer to Amended Complaint and Amended Cormterclaim ("Answer to Amended
Complaint") on Behalf of Defendant Saint—Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc. ("Saint—Gobain"),
filed April 7, 2008, alleges as follows:
Siemens Medical incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 18 of its Amended
Complaint as if fully set forth herein, and denies all new allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 18 of Saint-Gobain’s Answer to Amended Complaint, as well as in the First Affirmative
Defense, Second Affirmative Defense, Third Affirmative Defense, Fourth Affirmative Defense,
and Fifth Affirmative Defense therein.
1. Siemens Medical admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 of the
Amended Counterclaim asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.
2. Siemens Medical admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 2 of the
Amended Counterclaim asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.

Case 1:07-cv-00190-SLR Document 116 Filed O4/30/2008 Page 2 ot 4
3. Siemens Medical admits that Saint-Gobain seeks declaratory judgment
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 220l(a) and 2202. Siemens Medical further admits that Saint—Gobain’s
counterclaim for declaratoiy judgment is a mandatory counterclaim within the meaning of
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13. Siemens Medical further admits that the Court has
jurisdiction over Saint-Gobain’s declaratory judgment counterclaim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1338, but denies that the Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § ll3l. Siemens Medical
denies each of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph 3 of the Amended Counterclaim
asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.
4. Siemens Medical admits that venue is proper in this District under 28
U.S.C. § 1391 (b) and (c). Siemens Medical denies that venue is proper under 28 U.S.C.
§ l400(b) and denies each of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph 4 of the Amended
Counterclaim asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.
5. Siemens Medical admits it has alleged that Saint-Gobain is infringing and
has infringed, and that Saint-Gobain indeed is infringing and has infringed, U.S. Patent. No.
I 4,95_8,f)8O (“’08O patent," attached to Siemens Medical’s Amended Complaint as Ex. A).
Siemens Medical further admits that Saint-Gobain has denied that it is infringing any valid claim
of the ’08O patent. As noted in Paragraph 3 of this Reply, Siemens Medical admits that Saint-
Gobain seeks a declaratory judgment with respect to this issue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 220l(a)
and 2202. Siemens Medical denies each of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph 5 of
the Amended Counterclaim asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.
6. Siemens Medical denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 6
of the Amended Counterclaim asserted in the Answer to Amended Complaint.
2

Case 1:07-cv-00190-SLR Document 116 Filed O4/30/2008 Page 3 of 4
S Accordingly, Siemens Medical respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment
in favor of Siemens Medical and against Saint-Gobain on Saint-Gobairfs Amended
Counterclaim, that the Court deny Saint-Gobain’s request for declaratory relief and dismiss
Saint-Gobain’s Amended Counterclaim with prejudice, and that the Court award Siemens
Medical its costs and expenses in this matter.
Moiuus, Nrcnors, Ansar & TUNNELL LLP
Jack B. Blumengld (#1014)
S Maryellen Noreika (#3208)
A 1201 North Market Street
_ - P.O. Box 1347
Wilmington, DE 19899
(302) 658-9200
p [email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for Plaintyf
Siemens Medica! Solutions USA, Inc.
Of Counsel:
Gregg F. LoCascio
Charanj it Brahma
Sean M. McEldowney
KIRKLAND & ELL1s LLP
655 1_5th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-5793
(202) 879-5000
April 30, 2008
3

Case 1:07-cv-00190-SLR Document 116 Filed O4/30/2008 Page 4 of 4
- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on April 30, 2008, I electronically tiled the
foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF, which will send notification of such
filing(s) to the following:
Kelly E. Farnan, Esquire
RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, RA.
I also certify that copies were caused to be served on April 30, 2008 upon the
following in the manner indicated:
BY ELECTRONIC MAIL
and HAND DELIVERY
Kelly E. Farnan, Esquire ‘
RICHARDS, LAYToN & FINGER, RA.
One Rodney Square I
Wilmington, DE 19801
_ BY ELECTRONIC MAIL
Frederick L. Vlfhitmer, Esquire
THELEN Rsm BROWN RAYSMAN & STEINER LLP _·
875 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Maryellen Norgka (#3 208)