1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Leon B. Silver (#012884) lsilver@polsinelli.com Nathan J. Kunz (#024819) nkunz@polsinelli.com Keith J. Grady (pro hac vice pending) kgrady@polsinelli.com POLSINELLI PC CityScape One E. Washington St., Ste. 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Phone: (602) 650-2000 Fax: (602) 264-7033 Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA OEM Group, Inc., an Arizona corporation, Plaintiff, vs. SEMSYSCO, Inc., a Montana corporation, and SEMSYSCO, Semiconductor Systems Corporation GmbH, a limited liability company formed under the laws of Austria, Defendants. Plaintiff OEM Group, Inc. alleges: Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue 1. Plaintiff OEM Group, Inc. (OEM) is an Arizona corporation with its Case No. COMPLAINT JURY DEMAND

principal place of business in Maricopa County, Arizona. 2. Defendant SEMSYSCO, Inc. is a Montana corporation with its principal

place of business in Flathead County, Montana.

1
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.

Defendant SEMSYSCO, Semiconductor Systems Corporation GmbH is a

limited liability company formed under the laws of Austria. 4. SEMSYSCO, Inc. and SEMSYSCO, Semiconductor Systems Corporation

GmbH are collectively referred to herein as Defendant or SEMSYSCO. 5. This is an action for patent infringement in which OEM seeks preliminary

and permanent injunctive relief as well as damages resulting from Defendants infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,305,999 (the 999 Patent) (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Ex. A), U.S. Patent No. 6,701,941(the 941 Patent) (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Ex. B), U.S. Patent No. 6,273,108 (the 108 Patent) (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Ex. C), and U.S. Patent No. 6,267,125 (the 125 Patent) (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Ex. D) (collectively the Patents). 6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over OEMs claims under 28

U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a) because those claims arise under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 101, et seq. 7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant

does business in this District, and committed acts of infringement within this District by offering for sale and entering into a contract for sale of an infringing product in this District. 8. A substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to this action

occurred in this district. Venue is therefore proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 1400(b). General Allegations 9. This litigation arises from acts of patent infringement committed by

Defendant in this District in a continuing effort to compete unfairly with OEM. Defendants numerous other tortious acts are described in great detail in a related case filed concurrently herewith by OEM against The Thompson Group, Inc., which holds

2
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

itself out as the parent company of SEMSYSCO. 10. The Patents cover technology related to, among other things, systems,

methods and apparatuses for cleaning and etching semiconductive wafers. The wafers are used in various applications. OEM is the owner by assignment of the Patents. 11. With global headquarters in metro Phoenix, Arizona, and additional sites

throughout the United States, Europe, Japan and Asia, OEM is a semiconductor capital equipment manufacturer and innovator in new and remanufactured tools and services for the light emitting diode (LED), micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS), Wireless, Power, Energy Harvesting, wafer level package (WLP), Data Storage and Logic markets. 12. Herbert tzlinger is a former employee of a company known as Semitool

Austria GmbH, which is now named OEM Group Austria GmbH (the Austria GmbH). 13. Over the years, the Austria GmbH produced and developed various tools

used to clean semiconductive wafers. 14. In 2009, non-party Applied Materials, Inc. purchased the Austria

GmbHs parent company. 15. On or about May 3, 2011, Applied Materials sold the equity of the Austria

GmbH, along with other specified assets, to OEM and OEMs subsidiary OEM Technologies, LLC. 16. 2012. 17. By at least late February 2012, SEMSYSCO began to offer for sale Mr. tzlinger tendered his resignation to the Austria GmbH on January 2,

semiconductor cleaning apparatuses and systems that infringe, and/or induce or contribute to, the infringement of the Patents. 18. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO was only able to offer the

infringing systems for sale so quickly because it and/or Mr. tzlinger stole the Austria GmbHs trade secrets and proprietary information, including the Austria GmbHs concept

3
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

configurations, templates, and technical instructions. COUNT IInfringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,305,999 19. 20. OEM incorporates each preceding allegation herein. SEMSYSCO directly infringes, actively induces infringement, and/or

contributes to the infringement of one or more claims of the 999 Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271 by making, using, selling and/or offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 21. SEMSYSCO directly infringes the 999 Patent by making, using, selling

and offering for sale batch tools and other products and services within the United States, including, but not limited to, batch tools sold as the SAP 300, the SSP 300, and the SOP 300 (the accused products). The accused products and other of SEMSYSCOs products and services infringe the claims of the 999 Patent. 22. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a component of a

patented machine, article, manufacture, combination, or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing processes patented by the 999 Patent. 23. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a material part of

the invention claimed by the 999 Patent, and SEMSYSCO knows and has known that the same are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the 999 Patent. 24. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue are not staple articles or

commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 25. Others directly infringe the 999 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or

offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 26. Others directly infringe the 999 Patent through performance of the

methods claimed in the 999 Patent using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 27. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO has actual or constructive

knowledge of the 999 Patent.

4
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

28.

On information and belief, SEMSYSCO knows that others infringe the

999 Patent by making, using, selling and/or offering for sale infringing products and services within the United States. 29. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends to induce

others to infringe the 999 Patent and/or perform the methods claimed in the 999 Patent by using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 30. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends and takes

steps to ensure that others will directly infringe the 999 Patent through the sale, purchase and/or use of SEMSYSCOs products and services. 31. SEMSYSCOs conduct has damaged and will continue to damage OEM

in an amount to be proven at trial. 32. On information and belief, SEMSYSCOs infringement of the 999 Patent

is and has been willful, making this case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285. 33. SEMSYSCO threatens to continue to engage in the acts complained of

herein and, unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to OEMs irreparable injury. It would be difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that would afford OEM adequate relief for such future and continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. OEM does not have an adequate remedy at law to compensate it for the injuries threatened. COUNT IIInfringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,701,941 34. 35. OEM incorporates each preceding allegation herein. SEMSYSCO directly infringes, actively induces infringement, and/or

contributes to the infringement of one or more claims of the 941 Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271 by making, using, selling and/or offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 36. SEMSYSCO directly infringes the 941 Patent by making, using, selling

and offering for sale batch tools and other products and services within the United States,

5
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

including but not limited to the SAP 300, the SSP 300, and the SOP 300 (the accused products). The accused products and other of SEMSYSCOs products and services infringe the claims of the 941 Patent. 37. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a component of a

patented machine, article, manufacture, combination, or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing processes patented by the 941 Patent. 38. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a material part of

the invention claimed by the 941 Patent, and SEMSYSCO knows and has known that the same are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the 941 Patent. 39. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue are not staple articles or

commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 40. Others directly infringe the 941 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or

offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 41. Others directly infringe the 941 Patent through performance of the

methods claimed in the 941 Patent using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 42. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO has actual or constructive

knowledge of the 941 Patent. 43. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO knows that others infringe the

941 Patent by making, using, selling and/or offering for sale infringing products and services within the United States. 44. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends to induce

others to infringe the 941 Patent and/or perform the methods claimed in the 941 Patent by using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 45. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends and takes

steps to ensure that others will directly infringe the 941 Patent through the sale, purchase and/or use of SEMSYSCOs products and services.

6
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

46.

SEMSYSCOs conduct has damaged and will continue to damage OEM

in an amount to be proven at trial. 47. On information and belief, SEMSYSCOs infringement of the 941 Patent

is and has been willful, making this case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285. 48. SEMSYSCO threatens to continue to engage in the acts complained of

herein and, unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to OEMs irreparable injury. It would be difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that would afford OEM adequate relief for such future and continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. OEM does not have an adequate remedy at law to compensate it for the injuries threatened. COUNT IIIInfringement of U.S. Patent 6,273,108 49. 50. OEM incorporates each preceding allegation herein. SEMSYSCO directly infringes, actively induces infringement, and/or

contributes to the infringement of one or more claims of the 108 Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271 by making, using, selling and/or offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 51. SEMSYSCO directly infringes the 108 Patent by making, using, selling

and offering for sale batch tools and other products and services within the United States, including but not limited to the SAP 300, the SSP 300, and the SOP 300 (the accused products). The accused products and other of SEMSYSCOs products and services infringe the claims of the 108 Patent. 52. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a component of a

patented machine, article, manufacture, combination, or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing processes patented by the 108 Patent. 53. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a material part of

the invention claimed by the 108 Patent, and SEMSYSCO knows and has known that the same are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the 108

7
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Patent. 54. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue are not staple articles or

commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 55. Others directly infringe the 108 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or

offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 56. Others directly infringe the 108 Patent through performance of the

methods claimed in the 108 Patent using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 57. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO has actual or constructive

knowledge of the 108 Patent. 58. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO knows that others infringe the

108 Patent by making, using, selling and/or offering for sale infringing products and services within the United States. 59. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends to induce

others to infringe the 108 Patent and/or perform the methods claimed in the 108 Patent by using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 60. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends and takes

steps to ensure that others will directly infringe the 108 Patent through the sale, purchase and/or use of SEMSYSCOs products and services. 61. SEMSYSCOs conduct has damaged and will continue to damage OEM

in an amount to be proven at trial. 62. On information and belief, SEMSYSCOs infringement of the 108 Patent

is and has been willful, making this case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285. 63. SEMSYSCO threatens to continue to engage in the acts complained of

herein and, unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to OEMs irreparable injury. It would be difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that would afford OEM adequate relief for such future and continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. OEM does not have an adequate remedy at law to

8
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

compensate it for the injuries threatened. COUNT IVInfringement of U.S. Patent 6,267,125 64. 65. OEM incorporates each preceding allegation herein. SEMSYSCO directly infringes, actively induces infringement, and/or

contributes to the infringement of one or more claims of the 125 Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271 by making, using, selling and/or offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 66. SEMSYSCO directly infringes the 125 Patent by making, using, selling

and offering for sale batch tools and other products and services within the United States, including but not limited to the SAP 300, the SSP 300, and the SOP 300 (the accused products). The accused products and other of SEMSYSCOs products and services infringe the claims of the 125 Patent. 67. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a component of a

patented machine, article, manufacture, combination, or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing processes patented by the 125 Patent. 68. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue constitute a material part of

the invention claimed by the 125 Patent, and SEMSYSCO knows and has known that the same are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the 125 Patent. 69. SEMSYSCOs products and services at issue are not staple articles or

commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 70. Others directly infringe the 125 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or

offering to sell infringing products and services within the United States. 71. Others directly infringe the 125 Patent through performance of the

methods claimed in the 108 Patent using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 72. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO has actual or constructive

knowledge of the 125 Patent.

9
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

73.

On information and belief, SEMSYSCO knows that others infringe the

125 Patent by making, using, selling and/or offering for sale infringing products and services within the United States. 74. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends to induce

others to infringe the 125 Patent and/or perform the methods claimed in the 125 Patent by using SEMSYSCOs products and services. 75. On information and belief, SEMSYSCO specifically intends and takes

steps to ensure that others will directly infringe the 125 Patent through the sale, purchase and/or use of SEMSYSCOs products and services. 76. SEMSYSCOs conduct has damaged and will continue to damage OEM

in an amount to be proven at trial. 77. On information and belief, SEMSYSCOs infringement of the 125 Patent

is and has been willful, making this case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285. 78. SEMSYSCO threatens to continue to engage in the acts complained of

herein and, unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to OEMs irreparable injury. It would be difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that would afford OEM adequate relief for such future and continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. OEM does not have an adequate remedy at law to compensate it for the injuries threatened. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on any issue triable of right by jury. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, OEM requests judgment against Defendants as follows: A. A judgment preliminary and permanently enjoining Defendant

SEMSYSCO and any person acting in concert or cooperation with it from further infringing the Patents; B. A judgment that Defendant SEMSYSCO has infringed the Patents;

10
46051165.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 285;

C.

An award equal to the damages suffered by Plaintiff OEM resulting from

Defendant SEMSYSCOs infringement of the Patents, including interest and costs; D. Enhanced damages in accordance with the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 284

due to Defendant SEMSYSCOs willful infringement; E. A finding that this case is exceptional under the provisions of 35 U.S.C.

F.

An award to Plaintiff OEM of its reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to

35 U.S.C. 285; and G. That Plaintiff OEM be granted such other and further relief as the Court

deems just and proper.

DATED this 25th day of September, 2013. POLSINELLI PC By: /s/ Leon B. Silver Leon B. Silver Nathan J. Kunz CityScape One E. Washington St., Ste. 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Keith J. Grady (pro hac vice pending) 100 S. 4th Street Suite 1000 St. Louis, MO 63102 Tel: (314) 889-8000 Attorneys for Plaintiff

11
46051165.2