Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 1 of 18

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

DAVID SASSEEN (SBN 117125) LAW OFFICES OF E & SASSEEN 84 W. SANTA CLARA ST., SUITE 560 SAN JOSE, CA 95113 TELEPHONE: (408)569-1060 FACSIMILE: (408)286-2096 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PTI GLOBAL, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION ACTICON TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. PRETEC ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, a dissolved California corporation, PTI GLOBAL, INC., a California corporation, CHIU FENG CHEN, an individual, GORDON YU, an individual, TOMMY HO, an individual, ROBERT WU, an individual, GRACE YU, an individual, KUEI LU, an individual, and DOES 1 through 20, Defendants. Case No. C-07-4507 JF (HRL) (1) ANSWER OF PTI GLOBAL, INC. TO COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT, SUCCESSOR LIABILITY, ALTER EGO, FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS, IMPROPER DISSOLUTION, CONSPIRACY; (2) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL; and (3) CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS

C-07-4507 JF (HRL)
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 2 of 18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

ANSWER Defendant PTI Global, Inc. ("PTIG") hereby answers the Complaint of plaintiff Acticon Technologies LLC as follows: 1. PTIG admits that plaintiff brings this action. Except as so admitted, PTIG lacks

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 1 and so denies that paragraph. 2. PTIG admits that documents purporting to be U.S. Patent nos. 4,603,320 (the

"'320 Patent"), 4,543,450 (the "'450 Patent"), 4,972,470 (the "'470 Patent"), and 4,686,506 (the "'506 Patent") (The `320 Patent, `450 Patent, `470 Patent and `506 Patent are hereinafter referred to as the "Patents in Suit") are attached to the Complaint, and that the Patents in Suit describe various forms of electronic connectors. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 2 and so denies those allegations. 3. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 3 and so denies that paragraph. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 that it does import and resell certain electrical connectors, but denies that any electrical 25 26 27 28 7. connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit. JURISDICTION PTIG admits that the Complaint relies upon 28 U.S.C. sections 1331 and 1338(a)
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

4.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 4 and so denies that paragraph. 5. 6. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 5. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 6 of the Complaint as those allegations relate to defendants other than PTIG in this matter, and so denies those. PTIG denies that it makes any electronic connectors. PTIG admits

2
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 3 of 18

1 2 3 4

for its assertion of jurisdiction in this matter. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 7 of the Complaint. 8. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 8 of the Complaint as those allegations relate to defendants other than PTIG in this 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 11. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Pretec, and so denies that paragraph. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

matter, and so denies those allegations as to those defendants. PTIG admits that it is located in this District, but denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 8 of the Complaint. VENUE 9. PTIG admits that the Complaint relies upon 28 U.S.C. section 1391 for its

assertion of venue in this matter. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 9 of the Complaint as those allegations relate to defendants other than PTIG in this matter, and so denies those allegations as to those defendants. PTIG admits that it is located in this District, but denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 9 of the Complaint. INTRA-DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT 10. PTIG admits that paragraph 10 of the Complaint appropriately alleges Intra-

District Assignability, and does not dispute the allegation of paragraph 10. PARTIES PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 11 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 12. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 12 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 13. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

made in paragraph 13 of the Complaint against PCMCIA, CompactFlash and Secure Digital I/O products designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, imported sold or offered for sale by

3
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 4 of 18

1 2 3 4

14.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 14 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 15. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation

of paragraph 15 of the Complaint regarding Defendant Tommy Ho's status as a director of Pretec, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 23. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

or as a resident of Fremont, and so denies those allegations. PTIG admits that Tommy Ho was briefly listed as a director of PTIG, but denies that he was ever an officer of PTIG. 16. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation

of paragraph 16 of the Complaint regarding Defendant Robert Wu's status as a director of Pretec, or as a resident of Fremont, and so denies those allegations. PTIG admits that Robert Wu was briefly listed as a director of PTIG, but denies that he was ever an officer of PTIG. 17. 18. PTIG admits the allegations of paragraph 17 of the Complaint. PTIG admits that it imports, offers for sale and sells certain PCMCIA,

CompactFlash and Secure Digital I/O products that are sold to it under the brand name Pretec. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 18. 19. PTIG admits that Grace Yu was an officer and director of PTIG between January,

2002 and October, 2006. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 19. PTIG admits that Kuei Lu became an officer and director of PTIG in October,

2006, and has held those titles since that date. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 20. 21. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 21 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 22. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 22 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. As to the other defendants, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to

4
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 5 of 18

1 2 3 4

the truth of the allegations of paragraph 23 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. PTIG further denies the allegations of paragraph 23 of the Complaint as to PTIG. 24. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 24 of 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 29. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 of the allegations of paragraph 31 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

the Complaint and so denies that paragraph 25. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 25 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 26. PTIG admits that a complaint was filed commencing case no. C 06 4679 JF (HRL)

in the Northern District of California, which action was styled Acticon Technologies LLC v. Pretec Electronics Corp., et al., and that PEC was named as a defendant in that complaint. Except as so admitted, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 26 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 27. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 27 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 28. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 28 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 29 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 30. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 30 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 31. PTIG admits that the document attached to the Complaint as Exhibit E appears to

be a motion in the name of defendant Pretec requesting a 60 day continuance of the litigation in question. Except as so admitted, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

5
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 6 of 18

1 2 3 4

32.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 32 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 33. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 33 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 so denies that paragraph. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Complaint, particularly as to PCMCIA, CompactFlash and Secure Digital I/O products designed, 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

34.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 34 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 35. PTIG denies that the Certificate of Amendment to its of Articles of Incorporation

changing its name to PTI Global was filed with the California Secretary of State on the date listed in the Complaint. 36. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 36 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 37. PTIG admits that the document attached to the Complaint as Exhibit F appears to

be a Certificate of Dissolution filed by defendant PEC bearing a date stamp of November 28, 2006 with a signature over the printed name "Chiu Feng Chen," and that the document further bears the declaration recited in the Complaint. Except as so admitted, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 37 of the Complaint and

38.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 38 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 39. PTIG admits that it does import and resell certain electrical connectors, but denies

that any electrical connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit, and that PTIG is the instrument for continued infringement by the other named defendants. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations made in paragraph 39 of the

6
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 7 of 18

1 2 3 4

manufactured, marketed, distributed, imported sold or offered for sale by PRETEC, and so denies that paragraph. 40. PTIG admits that it does import and resell certain electrical connectors, but denies

that any electrical connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit. PTIG lacks 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 of paragraph 44 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. In addition, the `470 Patent 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 paragraph 46 of the Complaint. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations made in paragraph 40 of the Complaint, particularly as to PCMCIA, CompactFlash and Secure Digital I/O products designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, imported sold or offered for sale by PRETEC, and so denies that paragraph. 41. 42. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 41 of the Complaint. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 42 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. In addition, the `320 Patent appears to have expired and so would no longer have an owner. 43. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 43 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. In addition, the `450 Patent appears to have expired and so would no longer have an owner. 44. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

appears to have expired and so would no longer have an owner. 45. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 45 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. In addition, the `506 Patent appears to have expired and so would no longer have an owner. 46. PTIG admits that the subject matter described in the Patents in Suit is as described

in each of the individual patents. Other than as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of

7
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 8 of 18

1 2 3 4

47.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 47 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 48. PTIG denies that it was placed on notice of the alleged infringement prior to the

filing of the First Complaint, and lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 or did act on behalf of PTIG. As to the remaining allegations of paragraph 51, PTIG lacks 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PTIG further denies all of the allegations of paragraph 53 as they describe acts allegedly 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

remaining allegations of paragraph 48 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 49. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 49 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 50. PTIG denies the allegation of paragraph 50 that it is the successor to Pretec. PTIG

further denies all of the allegations of paragraph 50 as they describe acts allegedly committed by PTIG, except that PTIG admits that it does import and resell certain electrical connectors, but denies that any electrical connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit. As to the allegations of paragraph 50 applicable to other defendants, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and so denies that paragraph. 51. PTIG admits that it does import and resell certain electrical connectors, but denies

that any electrical connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit. PTIG further denies the allegation of paragraph 51 that any of the named defendants, other than Kuei Lu, could have

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and so denies that paragraph. COUNT I 52. PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

into paragraph 52 of the Complaint. 53. PTIG denies the allegation of paragraph 53 that it is the instrument of Pretec.

8
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 9 of 18

1 2 3 4

committed by PTIG. As to the allegations of paragraph 53 applicable to other defendants, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and so denies that paragraph. 54. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 54 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 55 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 56 of the Complaint. PTIG admits that it imports and resells certain electrical connectors, but denies that

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 www.ptiglobalusa.com are as described in the Complaint. The contact information obtained by 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 63. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

55. 56. 57.

any electrical connectors that it sells infringe any of the Patents in Suit. PTIG denies that it exclusively sells products branded with the Pretec name. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 57. 58. PTIG admits that products branded with the Pretec name are sold at the website,

www.ptiglobalusa.com, and that this website is owned by PTIG. PTIG denies that its current home page contains the header "Flash Memory Innovation by PRETEC." 59. PTIG admits the website at the location http://www.amazon.com/shops/pti_global

reads as indicated in the Complaint and is owned by PTIG. 60. PTIG admits that the address and telephone number on the website

counsel upon searching for the Pretec listing on whois.com is PMT Inc. 10F, No.480, Rueiguang Road, Neihu, Taipei, 114, Taiwan, R.O.C., and so PTIG denies the second sentence of paragraph 60 of the Complaint. 61. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 61 of the Complaint as the Google maps

search indicated returned several addresses, while the Yahoo maps search returned no results. 62. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 62 of the Complaint. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

9
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 10 of 18

1 2 3 4

and so denies the allegations of paragraph 63. 64. 65. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 64 of the Complaint. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 65 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 of paragraph 71 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 75. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

COUNT II 66. PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

into paragraph 66 of the Complaint. 67. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 67 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 68. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 68 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 69. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 69 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 70. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 70 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 71. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

72.

PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 72 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 73. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 73 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 74. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 74 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

10
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 11 of 18

1 2 3 4

of paragraph 75 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 76. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 76 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 77. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 83. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 of paragraph 86 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

of paragraph 77 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. COUNT III 78. PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

into paragraph 78 of the Complaint. 79. 80. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 79 of the Complaint. PTIG admits that Gordon Yu was an officer, director and shareholder of PTIG in

2002-2005, that Grace Yu was an officer and director of PTIG in 2002-2006, and that Kuei Lu became the sole officer, director and shareholder of PTIG in 2006. Except as so admitted, PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 80 of the Complaint. 81. 82. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 81 of the Complaint. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 82 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 83 of the Complaint and so denies that paragraph. COUNT IV 84. PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

into paragraph 84 of the Complaint. 85. 86. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 85 of the Complaint. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

11
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 12 of 18

1 2 3 4

87. 88. 89.

PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 87 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 88 of the Complaint. PTIG admits that Gordon Yu was an officer, director and shareholder of PTIG in

2002-2005, that Grace Yu was an officer and director of PTIG in 2002-2006, and that Kuei Lu 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 its host as www.pretec.com, where the identity of the owner is clearly listed as PMT Inc., a joint 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 into paragraph 96 of the Complaint. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

became the sole officer, director and shareholder of PTIG in 2006. Except as so admitted, PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and so denies the allegations of paragraph 89 of the Complaint. 90. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 90 of the Complaint as these allegations

apply to PTIG. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 90 and so denies these allegations. 91. PTIG denies the allegation of paragraph 91 of the Complaint that the only products

it sells are Pretec branded products, although no non-Pretec branded products are listed on PTIG's website. PTIG further admits that the current website, ptiglobalusa.com, was registered in

February, 2007, but denies that PTIG did not have an alternative website prior to that date. 92. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

and so denies the allegations of paragraph 92 of the Complaint. The press release in question lists

venture of C-ONE Technology Corp. and Walton Advanced Engineering, Inc. 93. 94. 95. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 93 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 94 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 95 of the Complaint. COUNT V 96. PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

12
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 13 of 18

1 2 3 4

97. 98. 99. 100.

PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 97 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 98 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 99 of the Complaint. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 100 of the Complaint. COUNT VI

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 apply to PTIG. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 patentability under one or more sections of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103 and 112. 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

101.

PTIG incorporates its response to each of the individual paragraphs incorporated

into paragraph 101 of the Complaint. 102. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 102 and so denies these allegations. 103. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 103 and so denies these allegations. 104. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 104 and so denies these allegations. 105. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

of paragraph 105 and so denies these allegations. 106. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 106 of the Complaint as these allegations

allegations of paragraph 106 and so denies these allegations. 107. PTIG denies the allegations of paragraph 107 of the Complaint as these allegations

apply to PTIG. PTIG lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 107 and so denies these allegations. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 108. The Patents in Suit are invalid because they fail to meet the conditions for

13
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 14 of 18

1 2 3 4 109.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendant has not infringed, induced infringement, or contributed to infringement

of the Patents in Suit. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 by PTIG to import, make, use, sell, or offer to sell the licensed technology licensed and non20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

110.

The Patents in Suit are unenforceable for inequitable conduct by the patentee

and/or its agents before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 111. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 112. Plaintiff's complaint, and each claim therein, fails to plead facts sufficient to

constitute a claim for relief against this defendant. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 113. complained of. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 114. Plaintiff has licensed the patents in question to PTIG's supplier, rendering any acts Recovery is barred because plaintiff, or its attorneys, consented to the actions

infringing under the first sale doctrine and an implied license. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 115. The allegations of the complaint are barred under the doctrines of waiver, estoppel,

including collateral estoppel, laches, unclean hands, merger, and res judicata as a result of plaintiff's actions in its first lawsuit against Pretec described in the Complaint; i.e., Acticon Technologies LLC v. Pretec Electronics Corp., et al; Case No. C 06-4679 JF (HRL).

14
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 15 of 18

1 2 3 4 116.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred because plaintiff is not the owner or assignee of the

Patents in Suit and accordingly lacks standing to bring this matter. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 // // // // // // // //
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

117.

Recovery is barred because the plaintiff has not suffered injury and, to the extent it

has been injured, the injuries complained of were the fault of others, and not of this defendant, and so are the responsibility of others, and not of this defendant. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 118. plaintiff. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 119. Plaintiff's remedy for patent infringement, if any, is limited to a reasonable royalty The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the non-patent claims made by

as plaintiff does not practice the Patents in Suit.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment on the Complaint as follows: 1. That judgment be entered in favor of PTIG and against plaintiff, and the plaintiff takes nothing by way of its complaint;

15
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 16 of 18

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

2. 3.

That plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice; That this case be deemed an exceptional case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 and accordingly, that defendants be awarded their costs, expenses and disbursements, including attorneys fees and costs incurred in defending against the claims filed by plaintiff; and

4.

That defendants be awarded any other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: January __, 2008

LAW OFFICES OF E & SASSEEN BY:__________________________________ DAVID SASSEEN ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PTI GLOBAL, INC.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, PTI Global, Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. Dated: January __, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF E & SASSEEN BY:__________________________________ DAVID SASSEEN ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PTI GLOBAL, INC.

CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS Local Rule 3-16 of the Local Rules for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

16
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 17 of 18

1 2 3 4

California requires the undersigned to certify any persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, corporations (including parent corporations) or other entities that (i) have a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or (ii) have a nonfinancial interest in that subject matter or in a party that could be substantially affected by the

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
C-07-4507 JF (HRL)

outcome of this proceeding. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-16, the undersigned certifies that as of this date, other than the named parties, there is no such interest to report. Respectfully submitted, DATED: January __, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF E & SASSEEN

BY:_______________________________________ DAVID SASSEEN ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PTI GLOBAL, INC.

17
\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2

Case 5:07-cv-04507-JF

Document 59

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 18 of 18

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

\\\LA - 89207/0001 - 224077 v2