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

LLC, a Texas Corporation, Plaintiff, v. CANON U.S.A., INC. a New York Corporation, CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation ) ) Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-19 ) ) ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Defendants.

COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Industrial Print Technologies LLC (IPT) complains against Defendants Canon U.S.A., Inc., and Canon Solutions America, Inc. (collectively, Defendants), as follows: NATURE OF ACTION This is an action for patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271. The patented technology, which is licensed exclusively to IPT, relates to industrial ink jet printing presses and provides systems and methods for controlling multiple inkjet printheads arranged within an inkjet printing press. The patented technology enables inkjet printing presses to synchronize multiple inkjet printheads, regardless of changes in the speed of the printing press and regardless of the position of the printheads along a web of paper within the inkjet printing press. The Defendants manufacture and sell inkjet printing presses that embody systems and methods that infringe the patented technology.

THE PARTIES 1. Plaintiff IPT is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of

Texas. IPT is in the business of licensing patented technology owned by Mr. Forrest P. Gauthier. IPT is the exclusive licensee of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,027,195; 6,145,946; and 6,493,106. 2. Defendant Canon U.S.A., Inc. (Canon U.S.A.) is a corporation incorporated under

the laws of New York with its principal place of business at One Canon Plaza; Lake Success New York 11042. Canon U.S.A. is registered to do business in Texas and has a designated registered agent in Texas for purposes of service of process. Canon U.S.A. by itself, and through one or more other entities owned, controlled or otherwise affiliated with Canon U.S.A. conducts business in and is doing business in Texas and in this District and elsewhere in the United States, including, without limitation, using, promoting, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses to end-users in this District, and enabling end-user purchasers to use such machines in this District. 3. Defendant Canon Solutions America, Inc. (CSA) is a New York corporation with

its principal place of business at 4 Ohio Drive; Lake Success, New York 11042. CSA is a subsidiary of Canon U.S.A. CSA is registered to do business in Texas and has a designated registered agent in Texas for purposes of service of process. 4. Upon information and belief Canon U.S.A. and CSA are jointly and severally liable

and/or joint tortfeasors with one another with respect to the matters alleged herein. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United

States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a).

6.

On information and belief, each Defendant is subject to this Courts specific and

general personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at least to their substantial business conducted in this forum, including (i) having solicited business in the State of Texas, transacted business within the State of Texas and attempted to derive financial benefit from residents of the State of Texas, including benefits directly related to the instant patent infringement causes of action set forth herein; (ii) having placed their products and services into the stream of commerce throughout the United States and having been actively engaged in transacting business in Texas and in this District; and (iii) either alone or in conjunction with others, having committed acts of infringement within this District. 7. On information and belief, defendant Canon U.S.A., either by itself or through its

subsidiaries, maintains systematic, continuous, and ongoing business operations within the State of Texas and this District, through which it uses, promotes, offers to sell, sells, and/or imports high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. 8. On information and belief, defendant CSA maintains systematic, continuous, and

ongoing business operations within the State of Texas and this District, through which it uses, promotes, offers to sell, sells, and/or imports high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. Specifically, CSA maintains sales offices in Nacogdoches, Texas, and Beaumont, Texas , through which it uses, promotes, offers to sell, sells, and/or imports high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. 9. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), 1391(c), and 1400(b)

because each Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District, resides in, has regularly conducted business in this District and/or has committed acts of patent infringement in this District.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION INFRINGEMENT OF 195 PATENT 10. Plaintiff hereby repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 to 9,

as if fully set forth herein. 11. On February 22, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,027,195 (the 195 patent), entitled

System And Method For Synchronizing The Piezoelectric Clock Sources Of A Plurality Of Ink Jet Printheads, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, was duly and legally issued to the inventors, Forrest P. Gauthier and Dimitrije L. Jovic. Messrs. Gauthier and Jovic assigned all right, title, and interest in the 195 patent to Varis Corp., which subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 195 patent to Tesseron, Ltd. (Tesseron). Tesseron subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 195 patent to Forrest P. Gauthier. Mr. Gauthier is the present owner of all right, title and interest in the 195 patent and has granted IPT an exclusive license to sue for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of the 195 patent. 12. Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally (Defendants), and/or through

their subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have in the past and continue to directly infringe the 195 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(a) by making, having made, using, importing, selling and/or offering to sell high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses, which are covered by the 195 patent, within the United States and within this District. Defendants have been and are engaged in direct infringing activities with regard to at least the Oc JetStream and ColorStream line of high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. Specifically, these presses include at least the JetStream 1000, JetStream 1400, JetStream 1900, JetStream 1500, JetStream 2200, JetStream 3000, JetStream 2300, JetStream 3300, JetStream 4300, JetStream 5500, ColorStream 3200, ColorStream 3500, ColorStream 3700, and ColorStream 3900 series of ink jet printing presses (hereinafter referred to as the Oc Inkjet Printing Presses).

13.

The Oc Inkjet Printing Presses were developed by, and/or based on, technology from

Oc N.V., which was formerly a corporation of the Netherlands with its principal place of business in Venlo, the Netherlands and operated in the U.S. through its subsidiary Oc North America, Inc. On information and belief, Canon, Inc, the Japanese parent of Canon U.S.A., acquired a majority ownership interest in Oc N.V. and reorganized the corporate structure such that Oc North America, Inc. was merged into the entity now named CSA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Canon U.S.A. As such, Defendant CSA is the successor in interest to Oc North America, Inc. 14. Upon information and belief, Defendants, jointly and severally, and/or through their

subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have induced and continue to induce the direct infringement of the 195 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(b) at least by one or more of supplying, offering for sale and selling Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with specific intent to cause and/or encourage such direct infringement of the 195 patent and/or with deliberate indifference of a known risk or willful blindness that such activities would cause and/or encourage direct infringement of the 195 patent. 15. On or about December 31, 2005 Tesseron, as the then current owner of all right, title,

and interest in the 195 patent, entered a license agreement with Canon, Inc. which, among other things, granted a license to Canon, Inc. for use of technology disclosed and claimed in the 195 patent. Thus, Defendants have had actual or constructive knowledge of the 195 patent and the scope of its claims since at least December 31, 2005. The license does not extend to the Oc Inkjet Printing Press business Canon acquired via purchase of its major competitor Oc N.V and related entities. Despite their awareness of the 195 patent and the technology claimed within the 195 patent, Defendants have continued to provide, sell and/or offer to sell Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with knowledge that the license between Canon and Tesseron does not extend to the Oc Inkjet

Printing Presses and with deliberate indifference towards the risk of infringing the 195 patent or willful blindness of the same. 16. Defendants direct infringement and/or inducement to infringe the 195 patent has

injured IPT. IPT is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 17. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to injure IPT by directly

infringing and/or inducing the infringement of the 195 patent. 18. Upon information and belief, each Defendant has continued its infringement

notwithstanding its actual knowledge of the 195 patent and while lacking an objectively reasonable good faith basis to believe that its activities do not infringe any valid claim of the 195 patent. Each Defendants infringement of the 195 patent has been and will continue to be willful and deliberate. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION INFRINGEMENT OF 946 PATENT 19. Plaintiff hereby repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 to 18,

as if fully set forth herein. 20. On November 14, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,145,946 (the 946 patent), entitled

Method For Generating A Stroke Frequency Signal On A Plurality Of Ink Jet Printheads, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, was duly and legally issued to the inventors, Forrest P. Gauthier and Dimitrije L. Jovic. Messrs. Gauthier and Jovic assigned all right, title, and interest in the 946 patent to Varis Corp., which subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 946 patent to Tesseron. Tesseron subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 195 patent to Forrest P. Gauthier. Mr. Gauthier is the present owner of all right, title, and interest in the 946 patent and has granted IPT an exclusive license to sue for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of the 946 patent.

21.

Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally (Defendants), and/or through

their subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have in the past and continue to directly infringe the 946 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(a) by making, having made, using, importing, selling and/or offering to sell high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses, which are covered by the 946 patent, within the United States and within this District. Defendants have been and are engaged in direct infringing activities with regard to at least the Oc JetStream and ColorStream line of high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. Specifically, these presses include at least the Oc Inkjet Printing Presses. 22. Upon information and belief, Defendants, jointly and severally, and/or through their

subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have induced and continue to induce the direct infringement of the 946 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(b) at least by one or more of supplying, offering for sale and selling Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with specific intent to cause and/or encourage such direct infringement of the 946 patent and/or with deliberate indifference of a known risk or willful blindness that such activities would cause and/or encourage direct infringement of the 946 patent. 23. On or about December 31, 2005 Tesseron, as the then current owner of all right, title,

and interest in the 946 patent, entered a license agreement with Canon which, among other things, granted a license to Canon for use of technology disclosed and claimed in the 946 patent. Thus, Defendants have had actual or constructive knowledge of the 946 patent and the scope of its claims since at least December 31, 2005. The license does not extend to the Oc Inkjet Printing Press business Canon acquired via purchase of its major competitor Oc N.V and related entities. Despite their awareness of the 946 patent and the technology claimed within the 946 patent, Defendants have continued to provide, sell and/or offer to sell Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with knowledge that

the license between Canon and Tesseron does not extend to the Oc Inkjet Printing Presses and with deliberate indifference towards the risk of infringing the 946 patent or willful blindness of the same. 24. Defendants direct infringement and/or inducement to infringe the 946 patent has

injured IPT. IPT is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 25. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to injure IPT by directly

infringing and/or inducing the infringement of the 946 patent. 26. Upon information and belief, each Defendant has continued its infringement

notwithstanding its actual knowledge of the 946 patent and while lacking an objectively reasonable good faith basis to believe that its activities do not infringe any valid claim of the 946 patent. Each Defendants infringement of the 946 patent has been and will continue to be willful and deliberate. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION INFRINGEMENT OF 106 PATENT 27. Plaintiff hereby repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 to 26,

as if fully set forth herein. 28. On December 10, 2002, U.S. Patent No. 6,493,106 (the 106 patent), entitled

Method For Synchronizing Pixel Deposition Frequencies Between A Plurality Of Print Engines, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C, was duly and legally issued to the inventors, Forrest P. Gauthier and Dimitrije L. Jovic. Messrs. Gauthier and Jovic assigned all right, title, and interest in the 106 patent to Varis Corp., which subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 106 patent to Tesseron. Tesseron subsequently assigned all right, title, and interest in the 195 patent to Forrest P. Gauthier. Mr. Gauthier is the present owner of all right, title, and interest in the 106 and has granted IPT an exclusive license to sue for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of the 106 patent.

29.

Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally (Defendants), and/or through

their subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have in the past and continue to directly infringe the 106 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(a) by making, having made, using, importing, selling and/or offering to sell high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses, which are covered by the 106 patent, within the United States and within this District. Defendants have been and are engaged in direct infringing activities with regard to at least the Oc JetStream and ColorStream line of high speed industrial-sized inkjet printing presses. Specifically, these presses include at least the Oc Inkjet Printing Presses. 30. Upon information and belief, Defendants, jointly and severally, and/or through their

subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have induced and continue to induce the direct infringement of the 106 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(b) at least by one or more of supplying, offering for sale and selling Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with specific intent to cause and/or encourage such direct infringement of the 106 patent and/or with deliberate indifference of a known risk or willful blindness that such activities would cause and/or encourage direct infringement of the 106 patent. 31. On or about December 31, 2005 Tesseron, as the then current owner of all right, title,

and interest in the 106 patent, entered a license agreement with Canon which, among other things, granted a license to Canon for use of technology disclosed and claimed in the 106 patent. Thus, Defendants have had actual or constructive knowledge of the 106 patent and the scope of its claims since at least December 31, 2005. The license does not extend to the Oc Inkjet Printing Press business Canon acquired via purchase of its major competitor Oc N.V and related entities. Despite their awareness of the 106 patent and the technology claimed within the 106 patent, Defendants have continued to provide, sell and/or offer to sell Oc Inkjet Printing Presses with knowledge that

the license between Canon and Tesseron does not extend to the Oc Inkjet Printing Presses and with deliberate indifference towards the risk of infringing the 106 patent or willful blindness of the same. 32. Defendants direct infringement and/or inducement to infringe the 106 patent has

injured IPT. IPT is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 33. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to injure IPT by directly

infringing and/or inducing the infringement of the 106 patent. 34. Upon information and belief, each Defendant has continued its infringement

notwithstanding its actual knowledge of the 106 patent and while lacking an objectively reasonable good faith basis to believe that its activities do not infringe any valid claim of the 106 patent. Each Defendants infringement of the 106 patent has been and will continue to be willful and deliberate. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for: 1. Judgment that the 195, 946, and 106 patents are each valid, enforceable, and

infringed by each Defendant; 2. 3 Judgment that Defendants acts of patent infringement are willful; A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining each Defendant, its officers,

agents, servants, employees, subsidiaries and affiliated companies, and those persons acting in active concert or participation therewith, from engaging in the aforesaid unlawful acts of patent infringement; 4. An award of damages arising out of each Defendants acts of patent infringement,

together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;

10

5. 284; 6.

Judgment that the damages so adjudged be trebled in accordance with 35 U.S.C.

An award of Plaintiffs attorneys fees, costs and expenses incurred in this action in

accordance with 35 U.S.C. 285; and 7. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

JURY DEMAND IPT demands trial by jury of all issues triable of right by a jury.

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS IPTs investigation is ongoing, and certain material information remains in the sole possession of the Defendants or third parties, which will be obtained via discovery herein. IPT expressly reserves the right to amend or supplement the causes of action set forth herein in accordance with Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

11

Dated: January 13, 2014

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Timothy P. Maloney by permission Wes Hill Timothy P. Maloney (IL 6216483) LEAD ATTORNEY Alison A. Richards (IL 6285669) Nicole L. Little (IL 6297047) David A. Gosse (IL 6299892) FITCH, EVEN, TABIN & FLANNERY 120 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Telephone: (312) 577-7000 Facsimile: (312) 577-7007 Steven C. Schroer FITCH, EVEN, TABIN & FLANNERY 1942 Broadway, Suite 213 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Telephone: (303) 402-6966 Facsimile: (303) 402-6970 T. John Ward, Jr. Texas State Bar No. 00794818 Email: jw@wsfirm.com Wesley Hill Texas State Bar No. 24032294 Email: wh@wsfirm.com WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM PO Box 1231 Longview, Texas 75606-1231 Telephone: (903) 757-6400 Facsimile: (903) 757-2323 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

12