Free Remark - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 1 of 16

CLOSED, DISCMAG, JURY, PATENT

U.S. District Court [LIVE] Eastern District of TEXAS LIVE (Marshall) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE

Rembrandt Technologies, LP v. Charter Communications, Inc., et al Assigned to: Judge T. John Ward Referred to: Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement Plaintiff Rembrandt Technologies, LP

Date Filed: 11/30/2006 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 830 Patent Jurisdiction: Federal Question

represented by Max Lalon Tribble, Jr Susman Godfrey LLP 1000 Louisiana Street Ste 5100 Houston, TX 77002-5096 713/651-9366 Fax: 17136546666 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Andrew Wesley Spangler Brown McCarroll - Longview 1127 Judson Rd - Ste 220 PO Box 3999 Longview, TX 75606-3999 903-236-9800 Fax: 19032368787 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brooke Ashley-May Taylor Susman Godfrey, LLP - Seattle 1201 Third Avenue Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101 206/516-3880 Fax: 206/516-3883 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Charles Ainsworth Parker Bunt & Ainsworth 100 E Ferguson Suite 1114 Tyler, TX 75702

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 2 of 16

US 903/531-3535 Fax: 903/533-9687 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Collin Michael Maloney Ireland Carroll & Kelley 6101 S Broadway Suite 500 Tyler, TX 75703 903/561-1600 Fax: 9035811071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Edgar G Sargent Susman Godfrey, LLP - Seattle 1201 Third Avenue Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101 206/516-3804 Fax: 206/516-3883 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Elizabeth L DeRieux Brown McCarroll 1127 Judson Rd - Ste 220 PO Box 3999 Longview, TX 75606-3999 903/236-9800 Fax: 9032368787 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Franklin Jones, Jr Jones & Jones - Marshall 201 W Houston St PO Drawer 1249 Marshall, TX 75670 903/938-4395 Fax: 9039383360 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Patrick Kelley Ireland Carroll & Kelley 6101 S Broadway Suite 500

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 3 of 16

Tyler, TX 75703 903/561-1600 Fax: 9035811071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Joseph Samuel Grinstein Susman Godfrey - Houston 1000 Louisiana Street Ste 5100 Houston, TX 77002-5096 713/651-9366 Fax: 7136546666 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Matthew R Berry Susman Godfrey, LLP - Seattle 1201 Third Avenue Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101 206/373-7394 Fax: 206/516-3883 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Otis W Carroll, Jr Ireland Carroll & Kelley 6101 S Broadway Suite 500 Tyler, TX 75703 903/561-1600 Fax: 9035811071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert Christopher Bunt Parker, Bunt & Ainsworth, P.C. 100 East Ferguson, Ste. 1114 Tyler, TX 75702 903/531-3535 Fax: 903/533-9687 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert M Parker Parker, Bunt & Ainsworth, P.C. 100 E Ferguson Suite 1114 Tyler, TX 75702

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 4 of 16

903/531-3535 Fax: 9035339687 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sidney Calvin Capshaw, III Brown McCarroll - Longview 1127 Judson Rd - Ste 220 PO Box 3999 Longview, TX 75606-3999 903/236-9800 Fax: 19032368787 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Tibor L. Nagy Susman Godfrey - Houston 1000 Louisiana Street Ste 5100 Houston, TX 77002-5096 713/653-7850 Fax: 713/654-6102 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Defendant Charter Communications, Inc. represented by Allen Franklin Gardner Potter Minton PC 110 N College Suite 500 PO Box 359 Tyler, TX 75710-0359 903/597-8311 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bradford P Lyerla Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Charles Edward Juister

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 5 of 16

Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gregory E Stanton Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jon-Thomas Bloch Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kevin D Hogg Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 317/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Margaret Lynn Begalle Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Edwin Jones

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 6 of 16

Potter Minton PC 110 N College Suite 500 PO Box 359 Tyler, TX 75710-0359 903/597/8311 Fax: 9035930846 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Paul Bryan Stephens Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William Joseph Kramer Marshall Gerstein & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606-6357 312/474-6300 Fax: 312/474-0448 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Charter Communications Operating, LLC represented by Allen Franklin Gardner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bradford P Lyerla (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Charles Edward Juister (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gregory E Stanton (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jon-Thomas Bloch (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 7 of 16

Margaret Lynn Begalle (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Edwin Jones (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Paul Bryan Stephens (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William Joseph Kramer (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Coxcom, Inc., represented by Allen Franklin Gardner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leroy M Toliver Kilpatrick Stockton 1100 Peachtree St Suite 2800 Atlanta, GA 30309 404/815-6483 Fax: 404/541-3274 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Edwin Jones (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mitchell G Stockwell Kilpatrick Stockton LLP 1100 Peachtree St Ste 2800 Atlanta, GA 30309-4530 404/815-6214 Fax: 14048156555 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Tonya R Deem Kilpatrick Stockton LLP NC

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 8 of 16

1001 W Fourth Street Winston-Salem, NC 27101 336-607-7485 Fax: 336-607-7500 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Movant Coxcom, Inc., Counter Claimant Charter Communications, Inc. Counter Claimant Charter Communications Operating, LLC V. Counter Defendant Rembrandt Technologies, LP represented by Tibor L. Nagy (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 11/30/2006

#

Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC, Coxcom, Inc., (Filing fee $ 350.) , filed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Attachments: # 1 # 2 # 3 # 4 # 5)(ehs, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 12/1/2006 (ehs, ). (Entered: 12/01/2006) 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/01/2006) E-GOV SEALED SUMMONS Issued as to Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC, Coxcom, Inc.,. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/01/2006) 3 Form mailed to Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/01/2006) 4 AMENDED COMPLAINT (First Amended Complaint) against all defendants, filed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A# (2) Exhibit B# (3) Exhibit C# (4) Exhibit D# (5) Exhibit E) (DeRieux, Elizabeth) Additional attachment(s) added on 12/1/2006 (ehs, ). (Entered: 12/01/2006) Filing fee: $ 350.00, receipt number 2-1-2128 (ch, ) (Entered: 12/05/2006)

11/30/2006 11/30/2006

11/30/2006 12/01/2006

12/04/2006

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 9 of 16

12/07/2006 12/07/2006 12/07/2006 12/12/2006 12/12/2006

5 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Robert M Parker on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Parker, Robert) (Entered: 12/07/2006) 6 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Robert Christopher Bunt on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Bunt, Robert) (Entered: 12/07/2006) 7 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Charles Ainsworth on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Ainsworth, Charles) (Entered: 12/07/2006) 8 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Franklin Jones, Jr on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Jones, Franklin) (Entered: 12/12/2006) 9 E-GOV SEALED SUMMONS Returned Executed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. Charter Communications, Inc. served on 12/4/2006, answer due 12/26/2006. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/15/2006) 10 E-GOV SEALED SUMMONS Returned Executed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. Charter Communications Operating, LLC served on 12/4/2006, answer due 12/26/2006. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/15/2006) 11 E-GOV SEALED SUMMONS Returned Executed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. Coxcom, Inc., served on 12/4/2006, answer due 12/26/2006. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/15/2006) 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 4 Amended Complaint, by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Jones, Michael) (Entered: 12/21/2006) 13 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 4 Amended Complaint, by Coxcom, Inc.,. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Jones, Michael) (Entered: 12/28/2006) 14 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Margaret Lynn Begalle for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 15 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Jon-Thomas Bloch for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 16 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Charles Edward Juister for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 17 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney William Joseph Kramer for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 18 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Bradford P Lyerla for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 19 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Gregory E Stanton for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications

12/12/2006

12/12/2006

12/21/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

12/28/2006

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 10 of 16

Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 12/28/2006 20 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Paul Bryan Stephens for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 28 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Kevin D Hogg for Rembrandt Technologies, LP. APPROVED (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Filing fee: $ 25., receipt number 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) 29 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Bradford P Lyerla for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC.APPROVED (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Filing fee: $ 25., receipt number 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Filing fee: $ 25., receipt number 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Juister; Fee: $25, receipt number: 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Kramer; Fee: $25, receipt number: 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Begalle; Fee: $25, receipt number: 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) 33 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Jon-Thomas Bloch for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. APPROVED (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Bloch; Fee: $25, receipt number: 618131 (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) 34 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Paul Bryan Stephens for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC.APPROVED (poa, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Margaret Begalle, Jon-Thomas Bloch, Charles Juister, William Kramer, Bradford Lyerla, Gregory Stanton, Paul Stephens; Fee: $175.00, receipt number: 6-1-8131 (ehs, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006) 21 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Matthew R. Berry on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Berry, Matthew) (Entered: 01/03/2007) 22 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Brooke Ashley-May Taylor on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 01/03/2007) 23 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Joseph Samuel Grinstein on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Grinstein, Joseph) (Entered: 01/03/2007) 24 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Sidney Calvin Capshaw, III on

12/28/2006 12/28/2006 12/28/2006

12/28/2006 12/28/2006 12/28/2006 12/28/2006 12/28/2006 12/28/2006

12/28/2006 12/28/2006

12/29/2006

01/03/2007 01/03/2007

01/03/2007

01/03/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 11 of 16

behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Capshaw, Sidney) Modified on 1/4/2007 (mpv, ). (Entered: 01/03/2007) 01/03/2007 25 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Andrew Wesley Spangler on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Spangler, Andrew) (Entered: 01/03/2007) 26 ORDER granting 12 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re 4 Amended Complaint. The time for Defendant Charter to answer, move or otherwise respond is extended to 1/23/07 . Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 1/3/07. (kjr, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) 27 ORDER granting 13 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re 4 Amended Complaint. The time for Defendant Coxcom Inc. to answer, move or otherwise respond is extended to 1/23/07 . Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 1/3/07. (kjr, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) Answer Due Deadline Updated for Charter Communications, Inc. to 1/23/2007; Charter Communications Operating, LLC to 1/23/2007; Coxcom, Inc., to 1/23/2007. (kjr, ) (Entered: 01/04/2007) 30 DOCKETED IN ERROR. SEE CORRECT DOCUMENT #16*** APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Charles Edward Juister for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC.APPROVED (poa, ) Modified on 1/4/2007 (Entered: 01/04/2007) 01/04/2007 31 ***DOCKETED IN ERROR. SEE CORRECT DOCUMENT # 17*** APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney William Joseph Kramer for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. APPROVED (poa, ) Modified on 1/4/2007 (ch, ). (Entered: 01/04/2007) 01/04/2007 32 ***DOCKETED IN ERROR. SEE CORRECT DOCUMENT # 14*** APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Margaret Lynn Begalle for Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC. APPROVED (poa, ) Modified on 1/5/2007 (ch, ). (Entered: 01/04/2007) 01/11/2007 01/11/2007 01/11/2007 01/11/2007 38 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Leroy M Toliver for Coxcom, Inc.. (ch, ) (Entered: 01/16/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Toliver; Fee: $25, receipt number: 2-12200 (ch, ) (Entered: 01/16/2007) 39 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Mitchell G Stockwell for Coxcom, Inc.. (ch, ) (Entered: 01/16/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Stockwell; Fee: $25, receipt number: 2-

01/03/2007

01/03/2007

01/03/2007

01/04/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 12 of 16

1-2201 (ch, ) (Entered: 01/16/2007) 01/12/2007 01/12/2007 01/15/2007 01/15/2007 01/15/2007 01/22/2007 40 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Edgar G Sargent for Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (ch, ) (Entered: 01/19/2007) Pro Hac Vice Filing fee paid by Sargent; Fee: $25, receipt number: 2-12207 (ch, ) (Entered: 01/19/2007) 35 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Otis W Carroll, Jr on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Carroll, Otis) (Entered: 01/15/2007) 36 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Collin Michael Maloney on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Maloney, Collin) (Entered: 01/15/2007) 37 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by James Patrick Kelley on behalf of Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Kelley, James) (Entered: 01/15/2007) 41 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 4 Amended Complaint, by Coxcom, Inc.,. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Jones, Michael) (Entered: 01/22/2007) 42 ANSWER to Amended Complaint and, COUNTERCLAIM against Rembrandt Technologies, LP by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC.(Jones, Michael) (Entered: 01/23/2007) 43 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC identifying Charter Communications, Inc. as Corporate Parent. (Jones, Michael) (Entered: 01/23/2007) 44 ORDER granting 41 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Answer deadline extended to 1/26/07 . Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 1/23/07. (ehs, ) (Entered: 01/23/2007) 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof by Coxcom, Inc.,. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of J. Spalding# 2 Exhibit 1# 3 Exhibit 2# 4 Exhibit 3A-C# 5 Exhibit 3D-E# 6 Exhibit 4# 7 Exhibit 5A-C# 8 Exhibit 6# 9 Exhibit 7# 10 Exhibit 8A-D# 11 Exhibit 9# 12 Exhibit 10A-B# 13 Text of Proposed Order Re: Personal Jurisdiction# 14 Text of Proposed Order Re: Subject Matter Jurisdiction# 15 Text of Proposed Order Re: Transfer to Delaware)(Jones, Michael) (Entered: 01/26/2007) 46 MOTION to Change Venue/Transfer case Contained in #45; proposed order attached to #45 by Coxcom, Inc.,. (mpv, ) (Entered: 01/29/2007) 47 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Allen Franklin Gardner on behalf of Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC (Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 01/29/2007) 48 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Allen Franklin Gardner on behalf of Coxcom, Inc., (Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 01/29/2007) 49 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Tibor L. Nagy on behalf of

01/23/2007

01/23/2007

01/23/2007

01/26/2007

01/26/2007 01/29/2007

01/29/2007 01/31/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 13 of 16

Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 01/31/2007) 02/02/2007 50 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 02/02/2007) 51 ORDER granting 50 Rembrandt Technologies, LP to respond to the motion to dismiss filed by dft CoxCom, Inc is moved from 2/12/07 to 2/23/07. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 2/5/07. (djh, ) (Entered: 02/05/2007) 52 NOTICE by Rembrandt Technologies, LP Notice of Related Action Currently Pending Before The Honorable T. John Ward (Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 02/05/2007) 53 Plaintiff's ANSWER to Counterclaim of Defendants, Charter Communications, INc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC and Coxcom, Inc. by Rembrandt Technologies, LP.(Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 02/12/2007) 54 ORDER - the court Transfers this case to the Honorable T. John Ward. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 2/13/07. (ch, ) (Entered: 02/13/2007) 55 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Tonya R Deem for Coxcom, Inc.(FEE PAID). (ch, ) (Entered: 02/15/2007) 56 RESPONSE in Opposition re 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof TO COXCOM, INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS filed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Tibor L. Nagy# 2 Exhibit A# 3 Exhibit B# 4 Exhibit C# 5 Exhibit D# 6 Exhibit E.1# 7 Exhibit E.2# 8 Exhibit F# 9 Exhibit G# 10 Exhibit H# 11 Exhibit I# 12 Exhibit J)(Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 02/23/2007) 57 REPLY to Response to Motion re 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof filed by Coxcom, Inc.,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2)(Jones, Michael) (Entered: 03/05/2007) 58 SUR-REPLY to Reply to Response to Motion re 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof filed by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Nagy, Tibor) (Entered: 03/08/2007) 59 NOTICE by Coxcom, Inc., of Filing Motion for Transfer and Consolidation of Rembrandt Technologies, LP Patent Litigation Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1407 (Attachments: # 1 MDL Motion for Transfer and Consolidation# 2 Motion Ex. A# 3 Motion Ex. B# 4 MDL Memorandum# 5 MDL Exhibit List# 6 MDL Notice of Appearance# 7

02/05/2007

02/05/2007

02/12/2007

02/13/2007 02/14/2007 02/23/2007

03/05/2007

03/08/2007

03/09/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 14 of 16

MDL Corporate Disclosure# 8 MDL Certificate of Service)(Stockwell, Mitchell) (Entered: 03/09/2007) 03/09/2007 60 Additional Attachments to Main Document: 59 Notice (Other), Notice (Other).. (Attachments: # 1 MDL Ex. 1# 2 MDL Ex. 2# 3 MDL Ex. 3# 4 MDL Ex. 4# 5 MDL Ex. 5# 6 MDL Ex. 6# 7 MDL Ex. 7# 8 MDL Ex. 8# 9 MDL Ex. 9# 10 MDL Ex. 10# 11 MDL Ex. 11# 12 MDL Ex. 12# 13 MDL Ex. 13# 14 MDL Ex. 14# 15 MDL Ex. 15# 16 MDL Ex. 16# 17 MDL Ex. 17# 18 MDL Ex. 18# 19 MDL Ex. 19# 20 MDL Ex. 20# 21 MDL Ex. 21# 22 MDL Ex. 22# 23 MDL Ex. 23# 24 MDL Ex. 24# 25 MDL Ex. 25# 26 MDL Ex. 26# 27 MDL Ex. 27# 28 MDL Ex. 28# 29 MDL Ex. 29# 30 MDL Ex. 30# 31 MDL Ex. 31# 32 MDL Ex. 32# 33 MDL Ex. 33# 34 MDL Ex. 34# 35 MDL Ex. 35# 36 MDL Ex. 36# 37 MDL Ex. 37# 38 MDL Ex. 38# 39 MDL Ex. 39# 40 MDL Ex. 40# 41 MDL Ex. 41# 42 MDL Ex. 42# 43 MDL Ex. 43)(Stockwell, Mitchell) (Entered: 03/09/2007) 61 NOTICE by Coxcom, Inc., re 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Transfer, and Brief in Support Thereof of Supplemental Authority Supporting its Motion to Transfer (Jones, Michael) (Entered: 03/29/2007) 62 NOTICE by Rembrandt Technologies, LP Joint Notice of Conference Regarding Proposed Discovery Order and Docket Control Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Discovery Order and Docket Control Order) (Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 03/30/2007) 63 NOTICE by Rembrandt Technologies, LP re 60 Additional Attachments to Main Document,,,, 59 Notice (Other), Notice (Other) Notice of Filing Opposition to CoxComs Motion for Transfer and Consolidation (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Rembrandts Brief in Opposition to CoxComs Motion For Transfer and Consolidation# 2 Exhibit Exhibit List# 3 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 1# 4 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 2# 5 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 3# 6 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 4# 7 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 5# 8 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 6# 9 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 7# 10 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 8# 11 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 9# 12 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 10# 13 Exhibit Exhibit 11# 14 Exhibit Exhibit 12# 15 Exhibit Opposition Brief Exh 13# 16 Exhibit Response to CoxComs Motion for Transfer and Consolidation# 17 Exhibit Reasons Why Oral Argument Should Be Heard# 18 Exhibit Proof of Service)(Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 04/05/2007) 64 ORDER - referring case to Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham in accordance with the assignments made by General Order 07-03. The magistrate judge shall conduct pre-trial proceedings pursuant to 28 USC 636. Signed by Judge T. John Ward on 4/18/07. (ch, ) (Entered: 04/18/2007) 65 NOTICE by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC, Coxcom, Inc., Notice of Development (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Hearing)(Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 04/18/2007)

03/29/2007

03/30/2007

04/05/2007

04/18/2007

04/18/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 15 of 16

04/19/2007

66 ORDER- REGARDING THE PROTECTIVE ORDER AND DOCUMENT PRODUCTION. Signed by Judge Charles Everingham on 4/19/07. (ch, ) (Entered: 04/19/2007) 67 DOCKET CONTROL ORDER Respond to Amended Pleadings 11/30/07. Amended Pleadings due by 11/16/2007. Discovery due by 5/14/2008. Joinder of Parties due by 5/3/2007. Claims Construction Hearing set for 2/13/2008 - 2/14/08 9:00 AM before Judge T. John Ward. Motions in limine due by 7/21/2008. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 7/24/2008. Jury Selection set for 8/4/2008 9:00AM before Judge T. John Ward. Pretrial Conference set for 7/24/2008 9:30 AM before Judge T. John Ward. Privilege Logs to be exchanged by parties 6/4/07. All other deadlines are set forth herein. Signed by Judge Charles Everingham on 4/19/07. (ch, ) (Entered: 04/19/2007) 68 NOTICE by Rembrandt Technologies, LP Of Proposed Protective Order (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Protective Order) (Taylor, Brooke) CORRECTED PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER added on 4/25/2007 (mpv, ). Modified on 4/25/2007 (mpv, ). (Entered: 04/24/2007) 69 NOTICE by Rembrandt Technologies, LP Re Electronic Production (Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 04/24/2007) NOTICE re 68 Notice (Other) CORRECTED PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER ADDED BY CLERK (mpv, ) (Entered: 04/25/2007) 70 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Charles Everingham : Scheduling Conference held on 4/30/2007. (Court Reporter Debbie Latham.)(delat, ) (Entered: 04/30/2007) TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on 4/3/07 before Judge Chad Everingham. Court Reporter: Transcriber/Susan Simmons. (lss) (Entered: 05/03/2007) 72 NOTICE by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC of Disclosures (Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 05/03/2007) 73 NOTICE of Disclosure by Coxcom, Inc.,, Coxcom, Inc., Notice of Service of Initial Disclosures (Stockwell, Mitchell) (Entered: 05/04/2007) 74 PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Charles Everingham on 5/4/07. (ehs, ) (Entered: 05/04/2007) 75 NOTICE of Disclosure by Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Berry, Matthew) (Entered: 05/07/2007) 76 NOTICE of Disclosure by Rembrandt Technologies, LP (Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 05/23/2007) 77 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct Docket Control Order by Rembrandt Technologies, LP. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Motion to Amend)(Taylor, Brooke) (Entered: 06/04/2007)

04/19/2007

04/24/2007

04/24/2007 04/25/2007

04/30/2007

05/03/2007

05/03/2007 05/04/2007 05/04/2007 05/07/2007 05/23/2007 06/04/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS

Document 86

Filed 06/28/2007

Page 16 of 16

06/06/2007

78 ORDER granting 77 Motion to Amend/Correct. Docket Control Order is amended to move date to exchange privilege logs to 7/10/07. Signed by Judge Charles Everingham on 6/5/07. (ch, ) (Entered: 06/06/2007) 79 NOTICE of Disclosure by Rembrandt Technologies, LP Regarding Compliance with Paragraph 3(b) of the Discovery Order (Berry, Matthew) (Entered: 06/12/2007) 80 **PLEASE IGNORE - PLEADING REFILED AS DOC #82**NOTICE of Disclosure by Coxcom, Inc., (Gardner, Allen) Modified on 6/14/2007 (rml, ). (Entered: 06/13/2007) 81 NOTICE of Disclosure by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC P.R. 3-3 and P.R. 3-4 (Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 06/14/2007) 82 ***REPLACES #80*** NOTICE of Disclosure by Coxcom, Inc., P.R. 3-3 and P.R. 3-4 (Gardner, Allen) Modified on 6/14/2007 (mpv, ). (Entered: 06/14/2007)

06/12/2007

06/13/2007

06/14/2007

06/14/2007

06/14/2007

***FILED IN ERROR. PLEASE IGNORE Document # 80, Notice of disclosure. DOCUMENT REFILED AS #82.*** (rml, ) (Entered: 06/14/2007)

06/21/2007

83 NOTICE by Charter Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Operating, LLC, Coxcom, Inc., of Multi-District Litigation Developments Pursuant to Local Rule CV-42 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Gardner, Allen) (Entered: 06/21/2007) 84 Interdistrict transfer to the District of Delaware, Wilmington DE. Pursuant to letter Elizabth Dinan was notified. Certified copy of Docket Sheet, Complaint, Transfer Order and letter were mailed to the Federal Blding, Lockbox 18, 844 N. King Street,Wilmington, DE (ch, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 6/28/2007 (ch, ). Modified on 6/28/2007 (ch, ). (Entered: 06/27/2007)

06/25/2007

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
06/29/2007 09:21:32 PACER Login: Description: ud0037 Docket Report Client Code: Search Criteria: Cost: 2:06-cv-00507-TJWCE 0.72

Billable Pages: 9

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-2 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 38

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/11/2007

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-2 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 38

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/11/2007

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-3 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 39

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/11/2007

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-3 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 39

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/11/2007

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-4 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 40

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/12/2007

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-4 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 40

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/12/2007

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-5 Document 35

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/15/2007

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP § § VS. § § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS § OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC. §

Civil Case No. 2:06-CV-507 LED JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE Notice is hereby given that the undersigned attorney, Otis Carroll, enters his appearance in this matter for Plaintiff, Rembrandt Technologies, LP, for purposes of receiving notices and orders from the Court. DATED this 15th day of January, 2007. Respectfully submitted, BY: /s/Otis Carroll Otis Carroll State Bar No. 03895700 Ireland, Carroll & Kelley, PC 6101 S. Broadway, Suite 500 Tyler, Texas 75703 Tel: (903) 561-1600 Fax: (903) 581-1071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this 15th day of January, 2007. /s/Otis Carroll

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-5 Document 35

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/15/2007

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-6 Document 36

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/15/2007

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP § § VS. § § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS § OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC. §

Civil Case No. 2:06-CV-507 LED JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE Notice is hereby given that the undersigned attorney, Collin M. Maloney, enters his appearance in this matter for Plaintiff, Rembrandt Technologies, LP, for purposes of receiving notices and orders from the Court. DATED this 15th day of January, 2007. Respectfully submitted, BY: /s/ Collin M. Maloney Collin M. Maloney State Bar No. 00794219 Ireland, Carroll & Kelley, PC 6101 S. Broadway, Suite 500 Tyler, Texas 75703 Tel: (903) 561-1600 Fax: (903) 581-1071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this 15th day of January, 2007. /s/ Collin M. Maloney

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-6 Document 36

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/15/2007

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-7 Document 37

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/15/2007

Page 1 of 1 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP § § VS. § § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., § CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS § OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC. §

Civil Case No. 2:06-CV-507 LED JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE Notice is hereby given that the undersigned attorney, Patrick Kelley, enters his appearance in this matter for Plaintiff, Rembrandt Technologies, LP, for purposes of receiving notices and orders from the Court. DATED this 15th day of January, 2007. Respectfully submitted, BY: /s/ Patrick Kelley Patrick Kelley State Bar No. 11202500 Ireland, Carroll & Kelley, PC 6101 S. Broadway, Suite 500 Tyler, Texas 75703 Tel: (903) 561-1600 Fax: (903) 581-1071 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this 15th day of January, 2007. /s/ Patrick Kelley

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-8 Document 41-1 Filed 06/28/2007 Page 1 1 of 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP, Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. CASE NO. 2:06CV-507-LED

CONSENT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT COXCOM, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant CoxCom, Inc. ("CoxCom"), with the consent of Plaintiff's attorney and pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, moves the Court for an extension of time in which to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. In support of this Motion, CoxCom shows the Court that: 1. CoxCom was served with the summons on December 4, 2006. On January 3,

2007, this Court extended CoxCom's deadline to answer or respond to the First Amended Complaint to January 23, 2007. 2. Defendant CoxCom requires a brief extension of time to properly prepare its

response to the First Amended Complaint. 3. 4. This Motion is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay. Counsel for Plaintiffs has agreed, subject to the Court's approval, to the

request for extension of time.

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-8 Document 41-1 Filed 06/28/2007 Page 2 2 of 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page of 3

WHEREFORE, Defendant CoxCom, Inc. respectfully requests that the Court grant an extension through and including January 26, 2007, in which to answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint. This the 22nd day of January 2007.

/s/ Michael E. Jones Mitchell G. Stockwell Lead Attorney Georgia Bar No. 682912 KILPATRICK STOCKTON LLP 1100 Peachtree St NE Suite 2800 Atlanta GA 30309-4530 Telephone: 404-815-6214 Facsimile: 404-815-6555 [email protected] Michael E. Jones State Bar No. 10929400 [email protected] Allen F. Gardner State Bar No. 24043679 [email protected] POTTER MINTON A Professional Corporation 110 N. College, Suite 500 (75702) PO Box 359 Tyler, Texas 75710 Telephone: 903-597-8311 Facsimile: 903-593-0846 Attorneys for CoxCom, Inc.

2
US2000 9720695.2 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-8 Document 41-1 Filed 06/28/2007 Page 3 3 of 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) and contemporaneously served upon all counsel who have consented to electronic service on this the 22nd day of January 2007. Other counsel shall be served by first class mail. /s/ Michael E. Jones Michael E. Jones.

3
US2000 9720695.2 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-9 Document 41-2 Filed 06/28/2007 Page 1 1 of 1 Filed 01/22/2007 Page of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP, Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. CASE NO. 2:06CV-507-LED

ORDER GRANTING CONSENT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT COXCOM, INC. TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant CoxCom, Inc., without waiving any defenses or any matters that might be presented pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) or any other rule or law, filed its consent motion to extend its time to respond to Plaintiff Rembrandt's First Amended Complaint until and through January 26, 2007. Such motion is granted. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant CoxCom, Inc. has until and through January 26, 2007, to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint.

4
US2000 9720695.2 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 1 of 11 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 2:06-CV-507 Judge Leonard E. Davis

DEFENDANTS CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.'S AND CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING LLC'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendants Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating LLC (collectively "Charter"), answer Rembrandt Technologies, LP's ("Rembrandt") FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as follows: The Parties 1. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of paragraph 1. 2. 3. 4. Charter admits the allegations of paragraph 2 for purposes of this litigation only. Charter admits the allegations of paragraph 3 for purposes of this litigation only. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of paragraph 4.

1

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 2 of 11 Page 2 of 11

Jurisdiction and Venue 5. Charter admits that this action invokes the United States patent laws and further

admits that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over patent law claims. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 5. 6. Charter admits that this Court has personal jurisdiction over them and that they

have conducted and do conduct business within the State of Texas for purposes of this litigation only. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 6. Charter is not infringing, and has not in the past infringed, any of the patents identified in Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. 7. Charter admits the allegations of paragraph 7 for purposes of this litigation only. Count I ­ Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,008,903 8. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations of

paragraphs 1-7. 9. Charter admits that a copy of U.S. Patent No. 5,008,903 ("the '903 patent"),

entitled "Adaptive Transmit Pre-Emphasis for Digital Modem Computed from Noise Spectrum," is attached to Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as Exhibit A. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 9 and demands strict proof thereof. 10. Charter admits that the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO")

issued the '903 patent on April 16, 1991. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of whether the '903 patent was "duly and legally issued" because these terms are not defined. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 10. 11. 12. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 11. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 12.

2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 3 of 11 Page 3 of 11

Count II ­ Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,710,761 13. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations of

paragraphs 1-7. 14. Charter admits that a copy of U.S. Patent No. 5,710,761 ("the '761 patent"), entitled

"Error Control Negotiation Based on Modulation," is attached to Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as Exhibit B. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 14 and demands strict proof thereof. 15. Charter admits that the USPTO issued the '761 patent on January 20, 1998.

Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of whether the '761 patent was "duly and legally issued" because these terms are not defined. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 15. 16. 17. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 16. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 17. Count III ­ Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,778,234 18. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations of

paragraphs 1-7. 19. Charter admits that a copy of U.S. Patent No. 5,778,234 ("the '234 patent"),

entitled "Method for Downloading Programs," is attached to Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as Exhibit C. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 19 and demands strict proof thereof. 20. Charter admits that the USPTO issued the '234 patent on July 7, 1998. Charter

lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of whether the '234 patent was "duly and legally issued" because these terms are not defined. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 20.

3

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 4 of 11 Page 4 of 11

21. 22.

Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 21. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 22. Count IV ­ Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,131,159

23.

Charter restates and incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations of

paragraphs 1-7. 24. Charter admits that a copy of U.S. Patent No. 6,131,159 ("the '159 patent"),

entitled "System for Downloading Programs," is attached to Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as Exhibit D. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 24 and demands strict proof thereof. 25. Charter admits that the USPTO issued the '159 patent on October 10, 2000.

Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of whether the '159 patent was "duly and legally issued" because these terms are not defined. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 25. 26. 27. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 26. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 27. Count V ­ Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,950,444 28. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its responses to the allegations of

paragraphs 1-7. 29. Charter admits that a copy of U.S. Patent No. 6,950,444 ("the '444 patent"),

entitled "System and Method for a Robust Preamble and Transmission Delimiting in a SwitchedCarrier Transceiver," is attached to Plaintiff's FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT as Exhibit E. Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of paragraph 29 and demands strict proof thereof.

4

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 5 of 11 Page 5 of 11

30.

Charter admits that the USPTO issued the '444 patent on September 27, 2005.

Charter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of whether the '444 patent was "duly and legally issued" because these terms are not defined. Charter denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 30. 31. 32. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 31. Charter denies the allegations of paragraph 32.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Further answering the First Amended Complaint, Charter asserts the following defenses. Charter reserves the right to amend its Answer with additional defenses as further information is obtained. 1. The claims of the '903 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements of Sections 101, 102, 103 and 112 of Title 35 of the United States Code. 2. The claims of the '761 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements of Sections 101, 102, 103 and 112 of Title 35 of the United States Code. 3. The claims of the '234 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements of Sections 101, 102, 103 and 112 of Title 35 of the United States Code. 4. The claims of the '159 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements of Sections 101, 102, 103 and 112 of Title 35 of the United States Code. 5. The claims of the '444 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more of the

requirements of Sections 101, 102, 103 and 112 of Title 35 of the United States Code. 6. The claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of laches or estoppel.

5

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 6 of 11 Page 6 of 11

COUNTERCLAIMS Charter, for its Counterclaims against Rembrandt, states as follows: Jurisdiction 1. These Counterclaims arise under the United States patent laws and the declaratory

judgment statute. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1338(a), 1367, 1400, 2201 and 2202. Factual Background 2. In its Complaint, Rembrandt asserts that Charter has infringed and does infringe

the '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents, directly and/or indirectly. 3. The '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents are invalid, and have not been and

are not infringed by Charter, either directly or indirectly. 4. Consequently, there is an actual case or controversy between the parties over the

infringement, validity, and/or enforceability of the '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents. First Counterclaim 5. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 6. Charter has not infringed and does not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid

and enforceable claim of the '903 patent. 7. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Second Counterclaim 8. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims.

6

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 7 of 11 Page 7 of 11

9.

Charter has not infringed and does not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid

and enforceable claim of the '761 patent. 10. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Third Counterclaim 11. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 12. Charter has not infringed and does not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid

and enforceable claim of the '234 patent. 13. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Fourth Counterclaim 14. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 15. Charter has not infringed and does not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid

and enforceable claim of the '159 patent. 16. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Fifth Counterclaim 17. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 18. Charter has not infringed and does not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid

and enforceable claim of the of the '444 patent.

7

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 8 of 11 Page 8 of 11

19.

This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Sixth Counterclaim 20. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 21. The claims of the '903 patent are invalid under one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101,

102, 103 and 112. 22. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Seventh Counterclaim 23. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 24. The claims of the '761 patent are invalid under one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101,

102, 103 and 112. 25. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Eighth Counterclaim 26. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 27. The claims of the '234 patent are invalid under one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101,

102, 103 and 112. 28. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim.

8

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 9 of 11 Page 9 of 11

Ninth Counterclaim 29. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 30. The claims of the '159 patent are invalid under one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101,

102, 103 and 112. 31. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. Tenth Counterclaim 32. Charter restates and incorporates by reference its allegations in paragraphs 1-4 of

its Counterclaims. 33. The claims of the '444 patent are invalid under one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101,

102, 103 and 112. 34. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 because Rembrandt filed its

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT with knowledge of the facts stated in this Counterclaim. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Charter respectfully requests that this Court order judgment in its favor on each and every Counterclaim set forth above, and award it relief including, but not limited to, the following: (a) (b) Dismissal of all of Rembrandt's claims against Charter with prejudice; Entry of judgment declaring that the claims of the '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents are not infringed by Charter; Entry of judgment declaring that the claims of the '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents are invalid; An injunction permanently enjoining Rembrandt and its officers, agents, servants, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from

(c)

(d)

9

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 10 of 11 Page 10 of 11

bringing or threatening to bring any suit or charge against Charter relating to alleged infringement of the '903, '761, '234, '159, and '444 patents; (e) A declaration that this action is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and an award to Charter of its attorneys' fees incurred in defending this action; and Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC By: /s/ Michael E. Jones Bradford P. Lyerla, Attorney in Charge Email: [email protected] Kevin D. Hogg Email: [email protected] William J. Kramer Email: [email protected] Charles E. Juister Email: [email protected] MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 6300 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606-6357 Tel: (312) 474-6300 Fax: (312) 474-0448 Michael E. Jones State Bar No. 10929400 POTTER MINTON, PC 110 North College 500 Plaza Tower Tyler, Texas 75702 Tel: (903) 597-8311 Fax: (903) 593-0846 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC

(f)

Dated: January 23, 2007

10

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-10 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 42

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 11 of 11 Page 11 of 11

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument has been forwarded via the Court's CM/ECF Filing System or via first class mail to each attorney/party of record on January 23, 2007. /s/ Michael E. Jones

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-11 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 43

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 1 of 3 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 2:06-CV-507 Judge Leonard E. Davis

DEFENDANTS' CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants, Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications Operating, LLC, provide the following Corporate Disclosure Statement. 1. Identity of Defendant's parent corporation: Defendant, Charter Communications, Inc. is the ultimate parent corporation of Defendant, Charter Communications Operating, LLC. Charter Communications, Inc. has no parent corporations. 2. Charter Communications Operating, LLC has no subsidiaries that are not ultimately wholly owned by Charter Communications Operating, LLC. Charter Communications, Inc. owns ten percent (10%) or more of Charter Communications Operating, LLC. 3. There are no subsidiaries not ultimately wholly owned by Charter Communications, Inc., nor any publicly held company that owns ten percent (10%) or more of Charter Communications, Inc.

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-11 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 43

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 2 of 3 Page 2 of 3

Dated: January 23, 2007

Respectfully submitted, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC By: /s/ Michael E. Jones Bradford P. Lyerla, Attorney in Charge Email: [email protected] Kevin D. Hogg Email: [email protected] William J. Kramer Email: [email protected] Charles E. Juister Email: [email protected] MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 6300 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606-6357 Tel: (312) 474-6300 Fax: (312) 474-0448 Michael E. Jones State Bar No. 10929400 POTTER MINTON, PC 110 North College 500 Plaza Tower Tyler, Texas 75702 Tel: (903) 597-8311 Fax: (903) 593-0846 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC

2

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-11 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 43

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/23/2007

Page 3 of 3 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) and contemporaneously served upon all counsel who have consented to electronic service, on this 23rd day of January, 2007. All other counsel shall be served by first class mail. /s/ Michael E. Jones

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Document 86-12 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of of 1 Filed 06/28/2007 Page 1 1 Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 4144 Filed 01/23/2007 Page 1 of 1 Document Case 2:06-cv-00507-LED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, LP, Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. CASE NO. 2:06CV-507-LED

ORDER GRANTING CONSENT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT COXCOM, INC. TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant CoxCom, Inc., without waiving any defenses or any matters that might be presented pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) or any other rule or law, filed its consent motion to extend its time to respond to Plaintiff Rembrandt's First Amended Complaint until and through January 26, 2007. Such motion is granted. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant CoxCom, Inc. has until and through January 26, 2007, to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 23rd day of January, 2007.

__________________________________ LEONARD DAVIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 4
US2000 9720695.2 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-13 Document 45-1

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/26/2007

Page 1 of 17 Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

REMBRANDT TECHNOLOGIES, L.P. Plaintiff, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING, LLC, and COXCOM, INC., Defendants. DEFENDANT COXCOM, INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, PERSONAL JURISDICTION, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TRANSFER, AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT THEREOF Defendant CoxCom, Inc. ("Defendant" or "CoxCom") moves pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss Plaintiff Rembrandt Technologies, L.P.'s ("Plaintiff" or "Rembrandt") claims against it on the grounds that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. In the alternative, CoxCom moves to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware where there is already an action pending involving the same parties and same issues. I. INTRODUCTION CASE NO. 2:06-CV-507 [LED]

The "first-to-file" rule instructs a district court to decline jurisdiction over an action when an action involving the same parties and same issues is already pending in another district.1 West Gulf Mar. Ass'n. v. ILA Deep Sea Local 24, 751 F.2d 721 (5th Cir. 1985); Mann Mfg., Inc. v.
Other parties in similar cases have filed similar motions to dismiss in other jurisdictions under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rather than 12(b)(1). However, West Gulf Mar. Assoc. v. ILA Deep Sea Local 24, 751 F.2d 721 (5th Cir. 1985), suggests that Rule 12(b)(1) is the appropriate rule. Id. at 730 (noting that "the court with `prior jurisdiction over the common subject matter' should resolve all issues presented in related actions."). Therefore, CoxCom has filed the current motion under Rule 12(b)(1) and acknowledges that other rules may be equally applicable.
1

1
US2000 9720059.5 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-13 Document 45-1

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/26/2007

Page 2 of 17 Page 2 of 17

Hortex, 439 F.2d 403, 408 (5th Cir. 1971). Such is the case here. On November 30, 2006, before Rembrandt filed this action, CoxCom filed a declaratory judgment action against Rembrandt in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, seeking a declaration of noninfringement and invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,008,903 (the "`903 Patent") (the "Delaware Action"). The instant action involves the very same issues. Namely, whether CoxCom's

activities of providing high-speed internet services infringe the `903 Patent. As the parties and issues involved in this second-filed case are the same as those in the first-filed Delaware Action, pursuant to the first-to-file rule, this Court must decline jurisdiction and either dismiss this action or transfer it to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware where it may be consolidated with the first-filed Delaware Action. As a second and independent basis for dismissal, the exercise of personal jurisdiction over CoxCom does not comport with federal due process. CoxCom, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia, does not do business in Texas such that it would be subject to this Court's general personal jurisdiction. Moreover, CoxCom does not own or operate any cable systems or provide high-speed internet services in Texas such that it would be subject to this Court's specific personal jurisdiction. In fact, CoxCom's only contact with Texas is a point of presence ("POP") node consisting of servers and routing equipment which is located in leased space in Dallas and which is unrelated to the accused methods and systems at issue in this case. Indeed, in another patent litigation matter pending in this judicial district, Judge Clark recently held that CoxCom did not have the minimum contacts with Texas sufficient to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction. USA Video Tech. Corp. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al; civil action number 2:06-CV-239-RHC.2 Defendant CoxCom respectfully requests

2

A true and correct copy of Judge Clark's order is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

2
US2000 9720059.5 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-13 Document 45-1

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/26/2007

Page 3 of 17 Page 3 of 17

that this Court similarly find that CoxCom has insufficient contacts with Texas to support jurisdiction and dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint as to Defendant CoxCom. II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

CoxCom filed the Delaware Action against Rembrandt at 4:33 p.m. EST on November 30, 2006,3 seeking a declaration that its activities in providing high speed internet access do not infringe the `903 Patent. Four hours later, at 7:41 p.m. Central, Rembrandt filed the instant action, asserting that CoxCom's activities in providing high speed cable modem internet products and services to subscribers infringe U.S. Patent No. 5,710,761 (the "`761 Patent"), No. 5,778,234 (the "`234 Patent"), No. 6,131,159 (the "`159 Patent"), and No. 6,950,444 (the "`444 Patent"). (Compl. ¶¶ 11, 16, 21, and 26.) The next day, acknowledging that the `761 Patent, `234 Patent, `159 Patent, `444 Patent and `903 Patent are related patents and alleging that the activity accused with respect to the `761 Patent, `234 Patent, `159 Patent and `444 Patent is the same activity accused with respect to the `903 Patent, Rembrandt amended its Complaint to include a claim for infringement of the `903 Patent (the `761 Patent, `234 Patent, `159 Patent, `444 Patent and `903 Patent are collectively referred to as the "Patents in Suit").4 (First Am. Compl. ¶¶ 8-12.) CoxCom, a cable service provider that offers various cable services to subscribers, including high speed internet access, is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. (Decl. of John Spalding in Supp. of Def. CoxCom, Inc.'s Mot. to Dismiss Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(2) ¶¶ 2, 4 [hereinafter Spalding Decl.].) CoxCom has no presence in Texas. CoxCom is not registered to do business in Texas and does not have any employees, does not maintain any place of business or office, and does not keep any

3 4

A true and correct copy of CoxCom's declaratory judgment complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. A true and correct copy of each of the Patents in Suit is attached hereto as Exhibits 3A-3E.

3
US2000 9720059.5 C8490-331049

Case 1:07-cv-00404-GMS Case 2:06-cv-00507-TJW-CE Document 86-13 Document 45-1

Filed 06/28/2007 Filed 01/26/2007

Page 4 of 17 Page 4 of 17

corporate books or records in Texas. (Id. ¶¶ 3, 6.) CoxCom does not own or operate any cable systems in Texas and does not provide any high speed internet services in Texas or to residents of Texas, and does not derive any revenues from Texas. (Id. ¶ 4.) In fact, CoxCom's only contact with Texas is an internet Point of Presence (POP) node consisting of servers and routing equipment located in leased space in Dallas.5 (Id. ¶ 5.) The node carries internet protocol traffic and is not related to the accused methods and systems. (Id.) CoxCom's parent company, Cox Communications, Inc. ("Cox Communications"), recently was named a defendant in an action filed by USA Video Technolo