SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

download SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

of 6

Transcript of SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    1/6

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRESignalQuest, Inc.

    CIVIL ACTION NO.Plaintiff,

    Tien-Ming Chou andOncque Corporation COMPLAINT FORDECLARA TORY RELIEFDefendants.

    ORIGINAL COMPLAINTPlaintiff SignalQuest, Inc. ("SignaIQuest" ), by its undersigned attorneys, files its Original

    Complaint against Defendants Tien- Ming Chou and Oncque Corporation ("Oncque ) alleging asfollows:

    NA TURE OFThis lawsuit seeks to put an end to Defendant's unjustified accusation of patent

    infringement. Defendant's conduct has, and continues to , put Signal Quest under a reasonableand serious apprehension of imminent suit. With this lawsuit , SignalQuest seeks declaratoryjudgment that SignalQuest's technology does not infringe the Tien-Ming Chou patent.

    THE PARTIESPlaintiff SignalQuest is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

    State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in 10 Water Street, Lebanon, NewHampshire.

    Upon information and belief, Tien-Ming Chou is an individual domiciled inTaiwan, and having a place of residence and mailing address of No. 41 , San-His 5th Street

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    2/6

    Taichung City, Taiwan. Tien-Ming Chou is the CEO ofOncque and the original owner of USPatent Number 6 706 979 (the ' 979 patent).

    Upon information and belief, Oncque is a corporation organized and existingunder the laws of Taiwan, with its principal place of business located at No.278 , SecA, TzuyuRd. , E. Dist. , Taichung City 40147 , TAIWAN (Republic of China). Uponbelief, Oncque engages in business in New Hampshire, but does not maintain a regular place ofbusiness in New Hampshire.

    JURISDICTION AND VENUEThis action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the

    United States Code, and Declaratory Relief Act.This is an action for non-infringement of a United States patent. This Court has

    exclusive jurisdiction of such action under Title 28 U.S. C. 99 1331 , 1338(a), and 2201(a).Upon information and belief, Defendants each have established minimum

    contacts with New Hampshire such that this venue is a fair and reasonable one. Defendants haveeach committed such purposeful acts and/or transactions in New Hampshire that they reasonablyknew and/or expected that they could be haled into this court as a future consequence of suchactivity. On July 7 , 2011 , Tien-Ming Chou, through his law firm Saint Island InternationalPatent & Law Offices , faxed and mailed a strong cease and desist letter to Signaldemanding that Signalof vibration switch products under model number SQ- SEN-200 in order to avoid legal liabilities.Not only does SignalQuest have its principle place of business in New Hampshire , but

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    3/6

    SignalQuest also manufactures product in New Hampshire, including manufacturing of modelnumber SQ-SEN-200.

    Upon information and belief, Tien-Ming Chou is a citizen of Taiwan. Tien-MingChou is also the owner of the ' 979 patent, as explained by the cease and desist letter, and one ofthe originators of the cease and desist letter.

    Upon information and belief, Oncque has ownership and/or licensee rights in the979 patent. It is believed that the ' 979 patent has either been assigned to Oncque and the

    assignment has not been recorded with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, orOncque has a license to enforce the ' 979 patent. This belief is based on multipleJuly 8 , 2011 , SignalQuest received notice that one of its distributors, GlobalSpec, the owner of aWeb site advertising products for sale, was contacted by Oncque and demanded by Oncque toremove SignalQuest products from the GlobalSpec Web site due to infringement of its patent.Oncque is demanding removal of SignalQuest product from the GlobalSpec Web site due toalleged patent infringement, then Oncque must have ownership rights in the ' 979 patent. Thecease and desist letter also makes a point of expressing Oncque ' s interest in979 patent by expressing that Tien-Ming Chou is the CEO ofOncque Corporation. As a party

    having rights to the ' 979 patent, Oncque should reasonably anticipate being a party to the presentcase.

    Defendant's conduct and connection with New Hampshire are such that theyshould reasonably anticipate being haled into court in New Hampshire.desist letter was sent to SignalQuest , located in New Hampshire , additional activities beyond thecease and desist letter have taken place. Oncque advertises their products for sale through Websites. www. globalspec. com

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    4/6

    (owned by GlobaISpec), which advertises products sold by Oncque and allows potentialpurchasers to view and select Oncque products for purchasing. Upon selection to purchasecontact information for Oncque is provided. Another Web site, belonging to Mouser Electronicsis made available through the URL www.mouser.com (the "mouser" Web site). The MouserWeb site advertises products sold by Oncque and allows potential purchasers to view, select, andpurchase Oncque products.

    allow for the successful online ordering ofOncque s products.10. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 US.C. 99 1391 and 28 US. c. 9 1400.

    PATENT-IN-SUIT11. On information and belief, Tien-Ming Chou is the owner of United States Patent

    No. 6 706 979 , entitled "Vibration Switch " which issued March 16, 2004. A copy of the ' 979patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

    12. On information and belief, Oncque has certain rights to the ' 979 patent.13. The ' 979 patent relates to a vibration switch. The vibration switch, among many

    other elements, at least requires a housing that is adapted to be mounted to a support , where thehousing has an upper wall and a lower wall that confine an accommodation chamber. First andsecond electric contact bodies are disposed in the accommodation chamber. First and secondelectrically conductive rollable bodies located within the chamber abut against first and secondtangential areas of the first and second electric contact bodies. Signalnot infringe any claims of the ' 979 patent.

    14. SignalQuest is continuing to make, use, sell, and offer for sale , products thatDefendants incorrectly claim infringe the ' 979 patent. Because the ' 979 patent is not infringed

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    5/6

    SignalQuest has no intention of taking a license under the ' 979 patent or stopping the making,using, selling, or offering for sale of SignalQuest product. Hence , due to this and stronglanguage of the cease and desist letter, SignalQuest is under a reasonable and seriousapprehension that it will imminently be sued by Defendants for infringement of one or more ofthe claims of the ' 979 patent, even though such claims are baseless. As a result, an actualcontroversy exists between Plaintiff and Defendants concerning whether the ' 979 patent is notinfringed.

    COUNT I.(Declaratory Judgment of Non-infringement)

    15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 are incorporated by reference as if stated fully herein.16. SignalQuest has not infringed any valid and enforceable claim of the ' 979 patent.17. SignalQuest seeks a declaration that the ' 979 patent has not been, and is not

    infringed by SignalQuest.

    PRAYER FOR RELIEFSignalQuest respectfully requests that the Court:A. Enter an , and does not, infringe any valid

    and enforceable claim of the ' 979 patent;B. Enter an C. 9285 , and

    awarding SignalQuest its attorney fees , costs, and expenses; andC. Grant

    and appropriate.

  • 8/6/2019 SignalQuest v. Chou et. al.

    6/6

    Respectfully submittedSIGNALQUEST , INC.By its Attorneys:SHEEHAN PHINNEY BASS + GREEN

    Dated: August 9 , 2011 :/s/ Robert R. LucicRobert R. Lucic, NH Bar #9062Peter A. Nieves, NH Bar #158051000 Elm StreetPO Box 3701Manchester, NH 03105-3701(603) 627-8188rlucic~sheehan. compnieves~sheehan. com