Free Amended Complaint - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE LG.PHILIPS LCD CO., LTD., Plaintiff, v. CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORPORATION; CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS USA, INC.; AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION; AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA; TATUNG COMPANY; TATUNG COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC.; AND VIEWSONIC CORPORATION, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 06-726-JJF DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORPORATION AND CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS USA, INC. Plaintiff LG.Philips LCD Co., Ltd. ("LG.Philips") for its First Amended Complaint against Defendants Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation and Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., and for its Complaint against AU Optronics Corporation; AU Optronics Corporation America; Tatung Company; Tatung Company of America, Inc.; and ViewSonic Corporation (collectively the "Defendants") for injunctive and declaratory relief and for damages, including treble or multiple damages, for patent infringement, states and alleges as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. LG.Philips is the owner of United States Patent No. 5,019,002 ("the `002

Patent"), United States Patent No. 5,825,449 ("the `449 Patent"), and United States Patent No. 4,624,737 ("the `737 Patent") (collectively the "Patents-in-Suit").

660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 17

2.

Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation claims to be the owner by assignment of

United States Patent No. 6,008,786 ("the `786 Patent"), United States Patent No. 6,013,923 ("the `923 Patent"), United States Patent No. 5,619,352 ("the `352 Patent"), and United States Patent No. 6,734,926 B2 ("the `926 Patent") (collectively "the Chi Mei Patents"). 3. This is a civil action for the infringement of the Patents-in-Suit, including the

willful infringement of the Patents-in-Suit by Defendants, and for a declaration of invalidity and non-infringement of the claims of the Chi Mei Patents. 4. The technology at issue involves the design and manufacture of Liquid Crystal

Display modules ("LCDs"), which are a type of flat panel display that are incorporated into at least LCD portable computers, LCD computer monitors, and LCD televisions.

THE PARTIES 5. Plaintiff LG.Philips is a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of

Korea, having a place of business located in Seoul, Korea. 6. Defendant Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation ("Chi Mei") is a Taiwanese

corporation, having its principal place of business at 2F, No. 1, Chi-Yeh Road, Tainan Science Based Industrial Park, Hsinshih Hsiang, Tainan Hsien 710, TAIWAN 74147, R.O.C. Chi Mei manufactures LCD products in Taiwan and China and, on information and belief, directs those products to the United States, including Delaware, through established distribution channels involving various third parties, knowing that these third parties will use their respective nationwide contacts and distribution channels to import into, sell, offer for sale, and/or use these products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States.

-2660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 17

7.

Defendant Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc. ("Chi Mei USA") is a domestic

subsidiary of Chi Mei that either directly or indirectly imports into, sells, and/or offers for sale its products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States. Chi Mei owns 100% of the shares of Chi Mei Optoelectronics Japan Co., Ltd. ("Chi Mei Japan"), which in turn owns 100% of the shares of Chi Mei USA. Chi Mei USA is a Delaware corporation, having its principal pace of business at 101 Metro Drive Suite 510, San Jose, CA 95110. Chi Mei USA markets and sells Chi Mei's products throughout the United States. 8. Defendant AU Optronics Corporation ("AUO") is a Taiwanese corporation,

having its principal place of business at 1, Li-Hsin Rd., II, Science-Based Industrial Park, Hsinchu City 30077 Taiwan, ROC. AUO manufactures LCD products in Taiwan and China and, on information and belief, directs those products to the United States, including Delaware, through established distribution channels involving various third parties, knowing that these third parties will use their respective nationwide contacts and distribution channels to import into, sell, offer for sale, and/or use these products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States. 9. Defendant AU Optronics Corporation America a/k/a AU Optronics America, Inc.

("AUO America") is a domestic subsidiary of AUO that either directly or indirectly imports into, sells, and/or offers for sale its products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States. AUO America is a California corporation, having its principal place of business at 1800 Wyatt Drive, Suite 7, Santa Clara, CA 95054. AUO America markets and sells AUO's products throughout the United States. 10. Defendant Tatung Company ("Tatung") is a Taiwanese corporation, having a

place of business at 22 Chungshan N Rd. Section 3, Taipei, Taiwan. Tatung assembles LCD

-3660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 17

products in Taiwan and, on information and belief, directs those products to the United States, including Delaware, through established distribution channels involving various third parties, knowing that these third parties will use their respective nationwide contacts and distribution channels to import into, sell, offer for sale, and/or use these products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States. 11. Defendant Tatung Company of America, Inc. ("Tatung America") is a domestic

subsidiary of Tatung that either directly or indirectly imports into, sells, and/or offers for sale its products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States. Tatung America is a California corporation, having a place of business at 2850 El Presidio Street, Long Beach, California 90810. Tatung America markets and sells Tatung's products throughout the United States. 12. Defendant ViewSonic Corporation ("ViewSonic") is a Delaware Corporation,

having a place of business at 381 Brea Canyon Road, Walnut, California 91789, which either directly or indirectly imports into, sells, and/or offers for sale its products in Delaware and elsewhere in the United States,

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 13. This action is based upon and arises under the Patent Laws of the United States,

35 U.S.C. § 100 et seq., and in particular §§ 271, 281, 283, 284 and 285, and is intended to redress infringement of the Patents-in-Suit owned by LG.Philips. 14. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 15. Additionally, this action is under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§

2201 and 2202, and the Patent Laws of the United States, based upon an actual controversy

-4660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 17

between LG.Philips and Chi Mei regarding the validity and infringement of the claims of the Chi Mei Patents, and is intended to provide appropriate and necessary declaratory relief. 16. Defendants have transacted and continue to transact business in the United States

and in this judicial district by: using or causing to be used; making; importing or causing to be imported; offering to sell or causing to be offered for sale; and/or selling or causing to be sold directly, through intermediaries and/or as an intermediary, a variety of products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit to customers in the United States, including customers in this judicial district, and Defendants will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 17. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Chi Mei, AUO, and Tatung, and venue

is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 (b) and (c) and (d), and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in that these Defendants are committing and are causing acts of patent infringement within the United States and within this judicial district, including the infringing acts alleged herein, both directly, through one or more intermediaries, and as an intermediary, and in that these Defendants have caused and cause injury and damages in this judicial district by acts or omissions outside of this judicial district, including but not limited to utilization of their own distribution channels established in the United States and Chi Mei USA's, AUO America's, and Tatung America's distribution channels in the United States, as set forth below, to ship a variety of products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit into the United States and into this judicial district while deriving substantial revenue from services or things used or consumed within this judicial district, and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 18. This Court has personal jurisdiction over AUO America and Tatung America and

venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 (b) and (c), and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in that these Defendants are committing acts of patent infringement within the United

-5660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 17

States and within this judicial district, including the infringing acts alleged herein, both directly, through one or more intermediaries, and as an intermediary. AUO America and Tatung America regularly import large quantities of AUO, and Tatung LCD products into the United States for distribution throughout the United States, including in this judicial district. AUO America and Tatung America are involved in the distribution of infringing LCD products and are aware that their products are sold throughout the United States, including in Delaware. The established distribution networks of these Defendants consist of national distributors and resellers, and these Defendants distribute to national retailers that have stores located in Delaware. By shipping into, offering to sell in, using, or selling products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit in this judicial district, or by inducing or causing those acts to occur, AUO America and Tatung America have transacted and transact business and perform works and services in this judicial district, have contracted and contract to supply services and things in this judicial district, have caused and cause injury and damages in this judicial district by acts and omissions in this judicial district, and have caused and cause injury and damages in this judicial district by acts or omissions outside of this judicial district while deriving substantial revenue from services or things used or consumed within this judicial district, and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 19. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Chi Mei USA, and venue is proper in

this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 (b) and (c), and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in that Chi Mei USA is incorporated and therefore resides in Delaware for purposes of establishing venue in this district, in that Chi Mei USA has been doing business in Delaware and is committing acts of patent infringement within the United States and within this judicial district, including the infringing acts alleged herein, both directly, through one or more intermediaries, and/or as an intermediary. Chi Mei USA regularly imports large quantities of Chi Mei LCD

-6660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 17

products into the United States for distribution throughout the United States, including in this judicial district. Chi Mei USA is involved in the distribution of infringing LCD products and is aware that its products are sold throughout the United States, including in Delaware. The established distribution networks of Chi Mei USA consist of national distributors and resellers, and Chi Mei USA distributes to national retailers that have stores located in Delaware. By shipping into, offering to sell in, using, or selling products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit in this judicial district, or by inducing or causing those acts to occur, Chi Mei USA has transacted and transacts business and performs works and services in this judicial district, has contracted and contracts to supply services and things in this judicial district, has caused and causes injury and damages in this judicial district by acts and omissions in this judicial district, and has caused and causes injury and damages in this judicial district by acts or omissions outside of this judicial district while deriving substantial revenue from services or things used or consumed within this judicial district, and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 20. This Court has personal jurisdiction over ViewSonic, and venue is proper in this

judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 (b) and (c), and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in that ViewSonic is incorporated and therefore resides in Delaware for purposes of establishing venue in this district, in that ViewSonic has been doing business in Delaware, including the infringing acts alleged herein, both directly, through one or more intermediaries, and/or as an intermediary, and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court.

THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT 21. On May 28, 1991, the `002 Patent, entitled "Method of Manufacturing Flat Panel

Backplanes including Electrostatic Discharge Prevention and Displays Made Thereby," was duly

-7660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 17

and legally issued. LG.Philips is the owner by assignment of all rights, title, and interest in and to the `002 Patent. A copy of the `002 Patent is attached as Exhibit A. 22. On October 20, 1998, the `449 Patent, entitled "Liquid Crystal Display Device

and Method of Manufacturing the Same," was duly and legally issued. LG.Philips is the owner by assignment of all rights, title, and interest in and to the `449 Patent. A copy of the `449 Patent is attached as Exhibit B. 23. On November 25, 1986, the `737 Patent, entitled "Process for Producing Thin-

Film Transistor," was duly and legally issued. LG.Philips is the owner by assignment of all rights, title, and interest in and to the `737 Patent. A copy of the `737 Patent is attached as Exhibit C. 24. LG.Philips owns the Patents-in-Suit and possesses the right to sue and to recover

for infringement of the Patents-in-Suit. 25. Defendants have been and are infringing and/or inducing infringement of the

Patents-in-Suit because they at least use, cause to be used, make, import, cause to be imported, offer for sale, cause to be offered for sale, sell, and/or cause to be sold in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND 26. LG.Philips has invested substantial time and money in designing, developing,

manufacturing and producing LCD products that incorporate the patented LCD technology. 27. LG.Philips derives substantial benefits from the exploitation of its patented

technology in the United States and abroad. LG.Philips' interests, including, but not limited to,

-8660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 17

these benefits have been and continue to be harmed by the Defendants' infringement of the Patents-in-Suit. 28. The Defendants at least use, cause to be used, make, import, cause to be imported,

offer for sale, cause to be offered for sale, sell, and/or cause to be sold in the United States and in this judicial district LCDs and/or LCD products that are encompassed by and/or made by the methods claimed in the Patents-in-Suit. 29. The Defendants have induced and/or continue to induce the infringement of the

Patents-in-Suit in the United States and in this judicial district. 30. Defendants maintain and develop relationships with business partners, including,

for example, suppliers and customers, to promote and encourage the import, offering for sale, sale and use of its infringing visual display products in the United States. 31. Defendants actively sell to and solicit business from customers and distributors

located in the United States. Defendants coordinate with these and other third parties concerning the designs, specifications, distribution and/or placement of orders regarding such LCDs and LCD products destined for the U.S. market. 32. Defendants also communicate with third parties to promote and encourage the

use, sale, importation and/or offering for sale of these same LCDs and LCD products in and into the United States. 33. Defendants have relationships with third parties to develop and supply the U.S.

market with such LCDs and LCD products. 34. Defendants communicate and meet with third parties about their LCDs and LCD

products and these communications and meetings facilitate the sale, offer for sale and/or distribution of Defendants' LCDs and LCD products to customers and users in the United States.

-9660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 17

COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF THE `002 PATENT 35. The allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated by

reference herein as if restated and set forth in full. 36. Defendants have infringed, and/or induced infringement of the `002 Patent by

making, using, causing to be used, offering to sell, causing to be offered for sale, selling, causing to be sold, importing, and/or causing to be imported products that are made by a method that infringes one or more claims of the `002 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. 37. The products made by the infringing method that are used, caused to be used,

sold, caused to be sold, offered for sale, caused to be offered for sale, imported, and/or caused to be imported by Defendants meet each and every limitation of at least one claim of the `002 Patent, either literally or equivalently. 38. LG.Philips has been and will continue to be injured by Defendants' past and

continuing infringement of the `002 Patent and is without adequate remedy at law. 39. Defendants have, upon information and belief, infringed and are infringing the

`002 Patent with knowledge of LG.Philips' patent rights and without a reasonable basis for believing their conduct is lawful. Defendants' infringement has been and continues to be willful and deliberate, and will continue unless enjoined by this Court, making this an exceptional case and entitling LG.Philips to increased damages and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.

- 10 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 17

COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF THE `449 PATENT 40. The allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated by

reference herein as if restated and set forth in full. 41. Defendants have infringed and/or induced infringement of the `449 Patent by

making, using, causing to be used, offering to sell, causing to be offered for sale, selling, causing to be sold, importing, and/or causing to be imported products that are made by a method that infringes one or more claims of the `449 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. 42. The products made by the infringing method that are used, caused to be used,

sold, caused to be sold, offered for sale, caused to be offered for sale, imported, and/or caused to be imported by Defendants meet each and every limitation of at least one claim of the `449 Patent, either literally or equivalently. 43. LG.Philips has been and will continue to be injured by Defendants' past and

continuing infringement of the `449 Patent and is without adequate remedy at law. 44. Defendants have, upon information and belief, infringed and are infringing the

`449 Patent with knowledge of LG.Philips' patent rights and without a reasonable basis for believing their conduct is lawful. Defendants' infringement has been and continues to be willful and deliberate, and will continue unless enjoined by this Court, making this an exceptional case and entitling LG.Philips to increased damages and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.

- 11 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 17

COUNT III INFRINGEMENT OF THE `737 PATENT 45. The allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated by

reference herein as if restated and set forth in full. 46. Defendants have infringed and/or induced infringement of the `737 Patent by

making, using, causing to be used, offering to sell, causing to be offered for sale, selling, causing to be sold, importing, and/or causing to be imported products that were made by a method that infringed one or more claims of the `737 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. 47. The products made by the infringed method that were used, caused to be used,

sold, caused to be sold, offered for sale, caused to be offered for sale, imported, and/or caused to be imported by Defendants meet each and every limitation of at least one claim of the `737 Patent, either literally or equivalently. 48. 49. LG.Philips has been injured by Defendants' infringement of the `737 Patent. Defendants have, upon information and belief, infringed the `737 Patent with

knowledge of LG.Philips' patent rights and without a reasonable basis for believing their conduct was lawful. Defendants' infringement has been willful and deliberate, making this an exceptional case and entitling LG.Philips to increased damages and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.

- 12 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 13 of 17

COUNT IV CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF THE `786 PATENT, THE `923 PATENT, THE `352 PATENT, AND THE `926 PATENT AGAINST DEFENDANT CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORPORATION 50. The allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated by

reference herein as if restated and set forth in full. 51. CMO has accused LG.Philips of infringing CMO's United States Patent No.

6,008,786 (the "`786 Patent")(a copy of which is attached as Exhibit D), United States Patent No. 6,013,923 (the "'923 Patent")(a copy of which is attached as Exhibit E), United States Patent No. 5,619,352 (the "'352 Patent")(a copy of which is attached as Exhibit F), and United States Patent No. 6,734,926 B2 (the "'629 Patent")(a copy of which is attached as Exhibit G) by filing a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. As such, there is a substantial controversy between the parties having adverse legal interests. 52. Claims of the `786 Patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements for patentability set forth in Title 35 of the United States Code. 53. Claims of the `923 Patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements for patentability set forth in Title 35 of the United States Code. 54. Claims of the `352 Patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements for patentability set forth in Title 35 of the United States Code. 55. Claims of the `926 Patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements for patentability set forth in Title 35 of the United States Code. 56. Because Chi Mei has asserted the Chi Mei Patents against LG.Philips, thereby

creating an actual controversy, declaratory relief is both appropriate and necessary to establish that one or more of the claims of the `786 Patent, the `923 Patent, `352 Patent, and the `926 Patent are invalid. - 13 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 14 of 17

COUNT V CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THE `786 PATENT, THE `923 PATENT, THE `352 PATENT, AND THE `926 PATENT AGAINST DEFENDANT CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORPORATION 57. The allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated by

reference herein as if restated and set forth in full. 58. LG.Philips' LCD modules do not infringe any claim of the `786 Patent, either

directly or under the doctrine of equivalents. 59. LG.Philips' LCD modules and/or methods of driving LCD modules do not

infringe any claim of the `923 Patent, either directly or under the doctrine of equivalents. 60. LG.Philips' LCD modules and/or methods for forming LCD modules do not

infringe any claim of the `352 Patent, either directly or under the doctrine of equivalents. 61. LG.Philips' LCD modules and/or methods for forming LCD modules do not

infringe any claim of the `926 Patent, either directly or under the doctrine of equivalents. 62. Because Chi Mei maintains that LG.Philips infringes the Chi Mei Patents, thereby

creating an actual controversy, a declaration of rights between LG.Philips and Chi Mei is both appropriate and necessary to establish that LG.Philips has not infringed and does not infringe any claim of the `786 Patent, the `923 Patent, `352 Patent, and the `926 Patent.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff LG.Philips prays for judgment as follows: A. That Chi Mei, Chi Mei USA, AUO, AUO America, Tatung, Tatung America, and

ViewSonic have infringed the Patents-in-Suit; B. That Chi Mei's, Chi Mei USA's, AUO's, AUO America's, Tatung's, Tatung

America's, and ViewSonic's infringement of the Patents-in-Suit has been willful; - 14 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 15 of 17

C.

That Chi Mei, Chi Mei USA, AUO, AUO America, Tatung, Tatung America, and

ViewSonic and their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, predecessors, assigns, and the officers, directors, agents, servants and employees of each of the foregoing, and those persons acting in concert or participation with any of them, are enjoined and restrained from continued infringement, including but not limited to using, making, importing, offering for sale and/or selling products that infringe, and from inducing the infringement of, the `002 Patent and `449 Patent, prior to their expiration, including any extensions; D. That Chi Mei, Chi Mei USA, AUO, AUO America, Tatung, Tatung America, and

ViewSonic and their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, predecessors, assigns, and the officers, directors, agents, servants and employees of each of the foregoing, and those persons acting in concert or participation with any of them deliver to LG.Philips all products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit for destruction at LG.Philips' option; E. That a judgment be entered against Chi Mei declaring that the claims of United

States Patent No. 6,008,786, United States Patent No. 6,013,923, United States Patent No. 5,619,352, and United States Patent No. 6,734,926 B2 are each invalid, and thus unenforceable against LG.Philips, its officers, agents, servants and employees; F. That a judgment be entered against Chi Mei declaring that LG.Philips has not

infringed and does not infringe any claim of United States Patent No. 6,008,786, United States Patent No. 6,013,923, United States Patent No. 5,619,352, and United States Patent No. 6,734,926 B2; G. That LG.Philips be awarded monetary relief adequate to compensate LG.Philips

for Chi Mei's, Chi Mei USA's, AUO's, AUO America's, Tatung's, Tatung America's, and

- 15 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 16 of 17

ViewSonic's acts of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit within the United States prior to the expiration of the Patents-in-Suit, including any extensions; H. That any monetary relief awarded to LG.Philips regarding the infringement of the

Patents-in-Suit by Defendants be trebled due to the willful nature of Chi Mei's, Chi Mei USA's, AUO's, AUO America's, Tatung's, Tatung America's, and ViewSonic's infringement of the Patents-in-Suit; I. interest; J. That this is an exceptional case and that LG.Philips be awarded the attorneys' That any monetary relief awarded to LG.Philips be awarded with prejudgment

fees, costs and expenses that it incurs prosecuting this action; and K. and proper. That LG.Philips be awarded such other and further relief as this Court deems just

- 16 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 17 of 17

JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of right by a jury.

THE BAYARD FIRM

/s/ Richard D. Kirk (rk0922) Richard D. Kirk (Bar I.D. 922) Ashley B. Stitzer (Bar I.D. 3891) 222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 900 P.O. Box 25130 Wilmington, DE 19899 (301) 655-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff LG.Philips LCD Co., Ltd. OF COUNSEL: Gaspare J. Bono Matthew T. Bailey R. Tyler Goodwyn Lora A. Brzezynski Cass W. Christenson McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP 1900 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 496-7500 May 22, 2007

- 17 660639-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 13 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-2

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 14 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-3

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 11

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-4

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 7

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 12

EXHIBIT D

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-5

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 12

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 14

EXHIBIT E

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 13 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-6

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 14 of 14

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 25

EXHIBIT F

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 13 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 14 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 15 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 16 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 17 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 18 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 19 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 20 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 21 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 22 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 23 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 24 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-7

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 25 of 25

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 21

EXHIBIT G

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 3 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 4 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 5 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 6 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 7 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 8 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 9 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 10 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 11 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 12 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 13 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 14 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 15 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 16 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 17 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 18 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 19 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 20 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-8

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 21 of 21

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-9

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 1 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned counsel certifies that, on May 22, 2007, he electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF, which will send automatic notification of the filing to the following: Edmond D. Johnson Thomas H. Kovach Pepper Hamilton LLP 1313 Market Street, Suite 5100 PO Box 1709 Wilmington, DE 19899-1709 Karen L. Pascale John W. Shaw Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, 17th Floor P.O. Box 391 Wilmington, DE 19899-0391 William E. Manning Jennifer M. Becnel-Guzzo Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, Suite 1410 Wilmington, DE 19801

Philip A. Rovner Dave E. Moore Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP 1313 North Market Street Wilmington, DE 19899-0951

The undersigned counsel further certifies that copies of the foregoing document were sent by email to the above counsel on May 22, 2007, and will be sent by hand on May 22, 2007, and were sent by email on May 22, 2007, and will be sent by first class mail on May 22, 2007, to the following non-registered participants:

John N. Zarian Samia McCall Matthew D. Thayne J. Walter Sinclair Stoel Rives LLP 101 S. Capitol Blvd., Suite 1900 Boise, ID 83702

Vincent K. Yip Peter J. Wied Jay C. Chiu Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP 515 South Flower Street Twenty-Fifth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071

656846-1

Case 1:06-cv-00726-JJF

Document 54-9

Filed 05/22/2007

Page 2 of 2

Kenneth R. Adamo Robert C. Kahrl Arthur P. Licygiewicz Jones Day North Point 901 Lakeside Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114-1190

Bryan J. Sinclair Karineh Khachatourian Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney 333 Twin Dolphin Drive Redwood Shores, CA 94065-1418

/s/ Richard D. Kirk (rk922) Richard D. Kirk

656846-1