Free Answer to Counterclaim - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No.: 05-27 SLR ) DELL, INC.; ) GATEWAY, INC.; ) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY; ) ACER INC.; ) ACER AMERICA CORPORATION; ) AOC INTERNATIONAL; ) ENVISION PERIPHERALS, INC.; ) TPV TECHNOLOGY, LTD.; ) TPV INTERNATIONAL (USA), INC.; ) AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION; ) AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA a/k/a ) AU OPTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; BENQ CORPORATION; ) BENQ AMERICA CORPORATION; ) CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES, LTD. a/k/a ) CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES COMPANY; ) TATUNG COMPANY; ) TATUNG COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC.; ) BOE HYDIS TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, LTD.; ) BOE HYDIS AMERICA INC.; ) CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS; ) COMPAL ELECTRONICS, INC.; ) DELTA ELECTRONICS, INC.; ) DELTA PRODUCTS CORPORATION; DELTA ELECTRONICS (THAILAND) PUBLIC ) COMPANY, LTD.; ) HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION; ) JEAN CO., LTD.; ) LITE-ON TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION; ) LITE-ON, INC. a/k/a LITEON TRADING USA, INC.; ) MAG TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, LTD.; ) MAG TECHNOLOGY USA, INC.; ) PROVIEW INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, LTD.; ) PROVIEW TECHNOLOGY, INC.; ) PROVIEW ELECTRONICS COMPANY, LTD.; and ) QUANTA DISPLAY, INC. ) Defendants. ) ) GUARDIAN'S REPLY TO DELL INC.'S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS GUARDIAN INDUSTRIES CORP.

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 2 of 6

Guardian Industries Corp. ("Guardian") replies to the amended counterclaims of Dell Inc. ("Dell") as follows: REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIMS 112. 113. 114. Admitted. Admitted. Guardian admits that Dell's counterclaims purport to include claims for

declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity and that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of these particular Dell counterclaims, but denies that the counterclaims have any merit and denies that Dell is entitled to any of the relief sought in its counterclaims or Prayer. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 114 of Dell's

counterclaim. 115. 116. Guardian admits that venue is proper in this Court. Guardian admits that there exists an actual controversy between Guardian and

Dell concerning infringement of the `214, `187, `065 and `588 patents. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 116 of Dell's counterclaims. 117. Paragraph 117 of Dell's counterclaims is a request for relief, and does not state

any allegation that calls for a response. Dell is not entitled to a declaration from the Court that Dell has not infringed any of the `214, `187, `065 and `588 patents, either directly, contributorily, or by inducement, or either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 117 of Dell's counterclaims. 118. Guardian admits that there exists an actual controversy between Guardian and

Dell concerning the alleged invalidity of the `214, `187, `065 and `588 patents. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 118 of Dell's counterclaims.

-2-

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 3 of 6

119.

Paragraph 119 of Dell's counterclaims is a request for relief, and does not state

any allegation that calls for a response. Dell is not entitled to a declaration from the Court that any of the `214, `187, `065 and `588 patents are invalid for failure to comply with the provisions of the patent laws, 35 U.S.C. § 100 et seq., including but not limited to one or more of 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 119 of Dell's counterclaims. 120. Guardian denies that Dell is entitled to recover any attorneys' fees and/or costs

from Guardian and denies that any of Guardian's activities provide any basis for finding in favor of Dell on the issue of whether this is an exceptional case. Guardian does contend that certain defendants' activities, including potentially Dell, provide a basis for this Court to find, in favor of Guardian, that this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and to award Guardian its attorneys' fees and its costs incurred in connection with this litigation. Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 120 of Dell's counterclaims. 121. Guardian admits that Paragraph 121 of Dell's counterclaims requests a trial by

jury as to all fact issues in this lawsuit. Guardian further responds that Paragraph 121 of Dell's filing contains no allegation that necessitates any admission or denial from Guardian, nonetheless, to the extent any response is necessary, Guardian denies any and all remaining averments in Paragraph 121 of Dell's counterclaims.

-3-

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 4 of 6

WHEREFORE Guardian respectfully submits that Dell's counterclaims should be dismissed, with costs assessed against Dell, and seeks such further relief as the Court deems appropriate. *****

Dated: April 26, 2005

/s/ Richard K. Herrmann Richard K. Herrmann (I.D. No. 405) MORRIS JAMES HITCHENS & WILLIAMS LLP 222 Delaware Avenue, 10th Floor Wilmington, Delaware 19801 302.888.6800 [email protected] Bryan S. Hales Craig D. Leavell Meredith Zinanni Eric D. Hayes KIRKLAND & ELLIS 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 861-2000 Counsel for Plaintiff Guardian Industries Corp.

-4-

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 5 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 26th day of April, 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing document, GUARDIAN'S REPLY TO DELL INC.'S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS, with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF which will send notification of such filing to the following: Richard L. Horwitz, Esq. David E. Moore, Esq. Potter Anderson & Corroon Hercules Plaza, 6th Floor 1313 N. Market Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Jeffrey S. Goddess, Esq. Rosenthal Monhait Gross & Goddess, P.A. 919 Market Street, Suite 1401 Wilmington, DE 19801 Gerard M. O'Rourke, Esq. Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP 1007 North Orange Street, P.O. Box 2207 Wilmington, Delaware 19899-2207 Josy W. Ingersoll, Esq. Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor LLP The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, 17th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801

Additionally, I hereby certify that on the 26th day of April, 2005, the foregoing document was served via email on the following non-registered participants:

Teresa M. Corbin, Esq. Howrey Simon Arnold & White LLP 525 Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105 [email protected] Roderick B. Williams, Esq. Avelyn M. Ross, Esq. Vinson & Elkins 2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746-7568 [email protected] [email protected]

York M. Faulkner, Esq. Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner Two Freedom Square 11955 Freedom Drive Reston, VA 20190-5675 [email protected] Peter J.Wied, Esq. Alschuler Grossman Stein & Kahan LLP 1620 26th Street, Fourth Floor, N Tower Santa Monica, CA 90404-4060 [email protected]

Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR

Document 68

Filed 04/26/2005

Page 6 of 6

Robert J. Gunther, Jr., Esq. Kurt M. Rogers Latham & Watkins 885 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 [email protected] [email protected]

Robert C. Weems, Esq. Baum & Weems 58 Katrina Lane San Anselmo, CA 94960 [email protected] Jeffrey A. Snyder, Esq. Thoits, Love, Hershberger & McLean 245 Lytton Avenue, Suite 300 Palo Alto, CA 94301 [email protected]

/s/ Richard K. Herrmann Richard K. Herrmann (#405) MORRIS, JAMES, HITCHENS & WILLIAMS LLP 222 Delaware Avenue, 10th Floor Wilmington, Delaware 19801 302.888.6800 [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff Guardian Industries Corp.

-2-