Free Answer to Counterclaim - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00605-JJF

Document 13

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

AMERICAN PATENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LLC, Plaintiff, v. MOVIELINK, LLC, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No. 07-605-JJF

ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS Plaintiff American Patent Development Corporation, LLC ("American"), by its undersigned counsel, responds to the correspondingly numbered paragraphs of the counterclaims of defendant Movielink, LLC ("Movielink") as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. American incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations in paragraphs

1 through 7 as if fully set forth herein. 9. Denied.

Case 1:07-cv-00605-JJF

Document 13

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 2 of 5

10.

American incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations in paragraphs

1 through 7 as if fully set forth herein. 11. American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference). 12. American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference). 13. American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference). 14. American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference). 15. American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference).

-2-

Case 1:07-cv-00605-JJF

Document 13

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 3 of 5

16.

American is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of these allegations because they attempt to define the claims of the `402 patent prior to the Court's claim construction (claim construction is governed by, among other things, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 2007 Order Setting Rule 16(b) Conference). 17. Denied.

American denies any allegation in the counterclaims that it has not expressly admitted herein. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. 2. The counterclaims fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Each claim of the `402 patent is presumed valid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282.

WHEREFORE, American requests the Court to grant it the following relief on Movielink's counterclaims: A. That judgment be granted in favor of American on the counterclaims, and that the

counterclaims be dismissed with prejudice; B. C. D. That the relief requested in the counterclaims be denied; That American be awarded its costs and attorney's fees; and That the Court award American such other and further relief as may be

appropriate in accordance with applicable law.

-3-

Case 1:07-cv-00605-JJF

Document 13

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 4 of 5

Dated: December 20, 2007

REED SMITH LLP

By:

/s/ Thad J. Bracegirdle Thad J. Bracegirdle (Del. No. 3691) 1201 Market Street Suite 1500 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (302) 778-7500 (Telephone) (302) 778-7575 (Fax) E-mail: [email protected]

Mark W. Wasserman (admitted pro hac vice) Matthew R. Sheldon (admitted pro hac vice) Reed Smith LLP 3110 Fairview Park Drive Suite 1400 Falls Church, Virginia 22042 (703) 641-4200 (Telephone) (703) 641-4340 (Fax) E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff, American Patent Development Corporation, LLC

-4-

Case 1:07-cv-00605-JJF

Document 13

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 5 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

AMERICAN PATENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LLC, Plaintiff, v. MOVIELINK, LLC, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 07-605-JJF

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 20, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing Answer to Counterclaims with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF which will send notification of such filing to the following counsel of record: Jeffrey L. Moyer, Esq. Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. One Rodney Square Wilmington, Delaware 19899 Scott W. Breedlove, Esq. Vinson & Elkins LLP Trammel Crow Center 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 3700 Dallas, Texas 75201 REED SMITH LLP By: /s/ Thad J. Bracegirdle Thad J. Bracegirdle (Del. No. 3691) 1201 Market Street, Suite 1500 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (302) 778-7500 E-mail: [email protected]