Verkada Denies Every Motorola ITC Allegation, Counters Avigilon "Out-of-Date"

Denies ***** **********

** *****-**** ********, ******* ***** **** it "****** **** *** every ********** ******* ** the ********* **** ** not ********* ******** *****."

************, ******* ****** **** it ** ********** ** the ******* ******** ** this *************:

******* **** *** ******** infringe, ********** ********, ********** to ************, ** ****** infringement ** *** ***** or *********** ***** ** the ******** *******, ****** literally ** ***** *** doctrine ** ***********, *** have *** ********* ********* any **** ** ********* of ** *.*.*. § 271 ** ** *.*.*. § ****.

*******, *** ******* **** it *** *** ******* in *** ****** *********** violating *** ****** *** of ****:

******* ****** **** ** has ******* ** ****** competition ** ******** ******* 337 ** *** ****** Act ** ****, ** amended, ** *********, ******* for ***********, ** ******* within *** ****** ****** after *********** *** ******** that ******** *** ***** and *********** ************ ******** rights ** ***** ** this *************.

******* *** *** ********* technical ******* **** ******* how ***** ******* ************ do *** ******** ** the * ******** *******. However, **** *** ** disclosed ***** ** *** investigation.

Verkada: ******** ******* *******/*************

*** * ******** ******* are **** ******* ** unenforceable ******* ***** *** exists, ******* *******:

*** ******** ****** ** the ******** ******* *** invalid ***** ** *.*.*. § *** ***/** § 103 ** **** ** at ***** *** ****** of ***** *** ********** and ******* ********** ** Appendix *, ****** ***** or ** ***********.

******* **** ******* ********'* patents **** *** *** when **** **** ******* for:

*** ******* ******** ******** that **** *** ***, were ******* ***** ** the *****, *** **** obvious *** ***** ** the **** ** *** patent ************.

Prior *** ******* ******

******* *** *******'* ********* ********* ******* ******* *** examples ** ***** *** for *** * ******** patents. *** ***** ******* 60 ******* *** ** patents, **** ** ***** date ** *** **** 1980s *** *****.

*** *******, *** ********* below ***** **** ******* that ******* ****** *** prior *** ** ********'* patent**,***,***: "****** *** ****** for ********** ******":

***** **** ********* *******, Verkada **** ***** ******* non-patent ************ *** ***-************. These ******* ********* ************ that **** ******** **** existed ****** ******** ******* for *** *******. *** example, ******* ***** *****'* Multisight ** ***** ***:

*******, *** ***** ********** examples ***** *** ****** about ******* ***** ************ or ****** ********, ******* of ***** ** ******** applicable ** ********** ******, so ** *** ********* how ***** *** ***** art.

******* ***** ******* ******** of ***** *** *** truly ** *** ***** specific ******* **** ** a *** ***** *** the *** ** ******.

Touts "******-******** *********"

*******'* ******** ***** *** "disruptive **********," ************** ****** from "*********** ************ **********":

******* ** **** ** Menlo ****, **********, ******* develops ********** ******** ****** and ********** ********* *****disruptive ********** **** ****** **** *********** ************ **********. [emphasis added]

*** "******-******** *********" **** the ****** *** ******* frequently **** "***-**-****" *******, Verkada ****:

******* ***** * ********** recent *******, *******’*ground-breaking ********* have already earned the trust of over 7,800 enterprise customers around the world—including numerous law enforcement agencies, school districts, hospitals, banks and financial institutions, and businesses in all sectors and of all sizes. In short, Verkada’s modern safety solutions are leading the market for enterprise surveillance products, most ** ***** *** ***-**-**** ******* **** **** **** ****** *** *******. [emphasis added]

Avigilon "*** ** ****," *****'* "**********" ******* ****

******* ************ ************* ****** from ********, ********** ******** is *** ** *** companies ***** "***-**-**** *******":

** ******** ** *******, Complainants *** ***** *** suppliers ******** ********** ************ products ***** ** *** traditional ********** *** *******.

************, ******* **** ******** fails ** ********** *******'* innovative **********:

*** *********evinces *** *********** ************’ ******* ** ********** *** ********** ********** on which Verkada’s products and solutions are based. Simply, the Complaint represents a contorted reading of Verkada’s marketing statements and other public materials. [emphasis added]

Domestic ******** ********

******* **** ******** ******** exists ** ** ***** established ** * *********** for ******** * ********* under ******* ***.** *.*.*. § ****(*)(*)******** *** ***** ** a ******** ******** ********:

(*)*********** ********** ** ***** and *********;

(*) *********** ********** ** labor ** *******; **

(*) *********** ********** ** its ************, ********* ***********, research *** ***********, ** licensing.

*** ***,** * **** ********** opinion, *** ******** ** state * ******** ******* threshold *** **** ****** as *********** **********. *** ITC *** ********* **** "there ** ** ********* monetary ****** **** * complainant **** ****" *** that "*** ******* ***** into ******** '*** ***** in **** *************, *** article ** ********, *** the ********* ** *** marketplace.'"

Verkada ****** ** ******** ********

*******, ******* ***** ** argue **** ********/******** ***** a ******** ******** ** these ************:

** ****, ************ **** not ***** * “******** industry” ** ***** ************.

********/******** **** ******** ************* ******** ** Texas, ***** *** ******* previously ****** *** **************** "********" ** ***** workers.

********* *** ********/********'* ***** Discovery *********, ******* **** ** plans ** "****** ********* and ********* ** ********* Complainants’ ********** **** **** have **** *********** ********** in ***** *** *********, significant ********** ** ***** or *******, *** *********** investment ** *** ************ of *** ******** *******."

Same *** **** ** ******* ******* ****

******* ** ***** *** same *** ****, ***** Emanuel, *** *** *** case ** ** ** for*******'* **** / ********* for *********** ******** ** Circuit *****.

Verkada ******* **** **** ** ****** ** ********

*******'* ******* ***** ****, however, **** **** ****** be ****** ********** *********:

** ********* *, ****, Respondent ***** * ********* in *** *.*. ******** Court *** *** ******** District ** ********** ******* declaratory ********* ** ***-************ of *** ******** *******. See *******, ***. *. Motorola *********, ***. ** al., **** **. *:**-**-****- (N.D. ***.). ************ ****** to **** * ****** to **** *** **** pending ********** ** **** Investigation.

** ****, *** ******* Court **** **** ****** be *** ** **** until ***** *** *** investigation ** *********.

Next ***** - ********** *** *********

*** ************* **** **** into ******* ********* *** fact *********** ****, ***** typically *********** *-* ****** ***** institution. *** *** **** order **** ******* ** decide ** * ******** for *** ***** ****, which **** **** * specific **** *** *** trial *** *** *** conclusion ** *** ***** investigation. **** **** ******** to ******* *** **** and ****** ***********.