ECeipt LLC v. Old Navy, LLC

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2019-cv-00258

eCeipt's ANSWER to {{11}} Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by eCeipt LLC.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION ECEIPT LLC, Plaintiff Case No. 6:19-cv-00258-ADA v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OLD NAVY, LLC, Defendant PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM Plaintiff eCeipt LLC ("Plaintiff") answers the counterclaim of Defendant Old Navy, LLC ("Defendant") as follows: THE PARTIES 1. According to the complaint, eCeipt is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the Texas with its principal place of business at 17330 Preston Road, Suite 200, Dallas, Texas 75252. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits the allegations in paragraph 1. 2. Old Navy is a Delaware limited liability company with a principal place of business located at Two Folsom Street, San Francisco, California 94105. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff admits the allegations in paragraph 2 of Defendant's Counterclaim. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This is an action for a declaration of non-infringement and invalidity of United 0 States Patent No. 8,643,875 (the "'875 patent"). This Court has jurisdiction over these counterclaims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338, and 2201. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Defendant's counterclaims. Plaintiff denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 3 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 4. Plaintiff is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits that this Court has personal jurisdiction over Plaintiff. 5. By filing suit in this district, plaintiff has asserted that venue is proper in this district. Old Navy disputes that venue is convenient, and reserves all rights to seek transfer to a more appropriate forum. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits that venue is proper in this judicial district. COUNT I – NONINFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,643,875 6. Old Navy incorporates and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-5 of these counterclaims. ANSWER: Plaintiff incorporates its responses to paragraphs 1-5 above as if fully set forth herein. 7. Plaintiff alleges that it is the owner of the '875 patent, and plaintiff has brought suit against Old Navy for infringement of the '875 patent. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits that it is the owner of the '875 Patent. 8. Plaintiff has no reasonable basis on which it may assert that Old Navy directly infringes, contributes to the infringement of, or induces infringement of any claim of the '875 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 2 0 ANSWER: Denied. 9. Claim 1 of the '875 patent, the only independent claim, requires that a POS (point- of-sale) system at a store location obtains "image data. . . representing a receipt corresponding to the purchasing transaction of the customer at the store location…" ANSWER: Paragraph 9 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Plaintiff admits, however, that claim 1 recites: 1. A method of processing receipts, comprising: obtaining transaction data from a point-of-sale (POS) computer system at a store location, the transaction data including a plurality of categories of information necessary to describe a purchasing transaction of a customer at the store location; obtaining image data from the POS system at a store location, the image data representing a receipt corresponding to the purchasing transaction of the customer at the store location; obtaining an e-mail address of the customer from a customer information database persistently associated with the POS system; providing, to a display device at the store location, an option to print the receipt at the store location and an option to e-mail the receipt to the customer; obtaining a selection of at least one of the provided options; if the option to print is selected, initiating printing of the image data at the store location; and if the option to e-mail is selected, e-mailing the receipt to the customer, including: providing the e-mail address obtained from the customer information database to a display device at the store location; obtaining customer confirmation whether the e-mail address is correct; if the e-mail address is not correct, obtaining a corrected e-mail address of the customer; transmitting the image data and the transaction data to a server in communication with one or more POS systems at one or more store locations, including generating PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 3 0 a data file, the data file including the transaction data, the correct e-mail address of the customer and a file name corresponding to the image data; assigning an e-mail template based on the data file transmitted to the server; and sending an e-mail to the correct customer e-mail address, wherein the content of the email is based on the assigned e-mail template, where the e-mail provides the image data obtained by the server. 10. Claim 1 further requires that the POS system transmit a "file name corresponding to the image data" to a server as part of a data file that is generated. ANSWER: Paragraph 10 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Plaintiff admits, however, that claim 1 recites: 1. A method of processing receipts, comprising: obtaining transaction data from a point-of-sale (POS) computer system at a store location, the transaction data including a plurality of categories of information necessary to describe a purchasing transaction of a customer at the store location; obtaining image data from the POS system at a store location, the image data representing a receipt corresponding to the purchasing transaction of the customer at the store location; obtaining an e-mail address of the customer from a customer information database persistently associated with the POS system; providing, to a display device at the store location, an option to print the receipt at the store location and an option to e-mail the receipt to the customer; obtaining a selection of at least one of the provided options; if the option to print is selected, initiating printing of the image data at the store location; and if the option to e-mail is selected, e-mailing the receipt to the customer, including: providing the e-mail address obtained from the customer information database to a display device at the store location; obtaining customer confirmation whether the e-mail address is correct; PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 4 0 if the e-mail address is not correct, obtaining a corrected e-mail address of the customer; transmitting the image data and the transaction data to a server in communication with one or more POS systems at one or more store locations, including generating a data file, the data file including the transaction data, the correct e-mail address of the customer and a file name corresponding to the image data; assigning an e-mail template based on the data file transmitted to the server; and sending an e-mail to the correct customer e-mail address, wherein the content of the email is based on the assigned e-mail template, where the e-mail provides the image data obtained by the server. 11. Old Navy does not perform these elements of claim 1. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 11 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 12. The accused system plaintiff calls the POS system ("POS system") does not transmit image data representing a receipt to a server. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 12 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 13. The POS system does not obtain, generate or capture image data representing a receipt corresponding to a purchasing transaction of a customer at a store location. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 13 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 14. Claim 1 further requires transmitting the file name of the image data to a server: transmitting the image data and the transaction data to a server in communication with one or more POS systems at one or more store locations, including generating a data file, the data file including the transaction data, the correct e-mail address of the customer and a file name corresponding to the image data; PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 5 0 Cl. 1, 14:11-16 (emphasis added). ANSWER: Paragraph 14 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Plaintiff admits, however, that claim 1 recites: 1. A method of processing receipts, comprising: obtaining transaction data from a point-of-sale (POS) computer system at a store location, the transaction data including a plurality of categories of information necessary to describe a purchasing transaction of a customer at the store location; obtaining image data from the POS system at a store location, the image data representing a receipt corresponding to the purchasing transaction of the customer at the store location; obtaining an e-mail address of the customer from a customer information database persistently associated with the POS system; providing, to a display device at the store location, an option to print the receipt at the store location and an option to e-mail the receipt to the customer; obtaining a selection of at least one of the provided options; if the option to print is selected, initiating printing of the image data at the store location; and if the option to e-mail is selected, e-mailing the receipt to the customer, including: providing the e-mail address obtained from the customer information database to a display device at the store location; obtaining customer confirmation whether the e-mail address is correct; if the e-mail address is not correct, obtaining a corrected e-mail address of the customer; transmitting the image data and the transaction data to a server in communication with one or more POS systems at one or more store locations, including generating a data file, the data file including the transaction data, the correct e-mail address of the customer and a file name corresponding to the image data; assigning an e-mail template based on the data file transmitted to the server; and PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 6 0 sending an e-mail to the correct customer e-mail address, wherein the content of the email is based on the assigned e-mail template, where the e-mail provides the image data obtained by the server. 15. Old Navy does not transmit a file name corresponding to image data to a server in communication with a POS system. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 15 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 16. For at least the reasons set forth above, Old Navy has not infringed and is not infringing, directly, by inducement, or contributorily, any claim of the '875 patent asserted against it, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and is not liable for infringement thereof. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 16 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 17. Plaintiff had no evidence that Old Navy performed the elements identified above at the time it filed suit against Old Navy. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 17 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 18. Notwithstanding its lack of evidence, plaintiff proceeded to file suit contending Old Navy infringed the '875 patent. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies the allegations in paragraph 18 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 19. Old Navy has informed plaintiff that Old Navy does not perform the elements identified above since the time it was served with the complaint, and demanded that plaintiff dismiss the case against Old Navy. Old Navy informed plaintiff that if plaintiff PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 7 0 did not dismiss the case, Old Navy would seek attorneys' fees when it ultimately prevails in establishing it does not infringe the '875 patent. ANSWER: Plaintiff denies that Defendant has established or provided any evidence that it does not infringe the '875 Patent. Plaintiff requested actual proof or evidence from Defendant that it does not perform the steps of claim 1 of the '875 Patent. Tellingly, Defendant has failed to provide any such evidence or even a declaration that it does not infringe. Plaintiff admits that Defendant denies it infringes the '875 Patent. Plaintiff denies Defendant is entitled to attorneys' fees. 20. After receiving notice that Old Navy does not infringe, plaintiff has failed to dismiss the case against Old Navy. ANSWER: On information and belief, Plaintiff denies that Defendant has established or provided any evidence that it does not infringe the '875 Patent. Plaintiff requested actual proof or evidence from Defendant that it does not perform the steps of claim 1 of the '875 Patent. Tellingly, Defendant has failed to provide any such evidence or even a declaration that it does not infringe. 21. An actual case and controversy exists between plaintiff and Old Navy based on plaintiff having filed a complaint alleging infringement of the '875 patent, and that controversy is ripe for adjudication by this Court. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits an actual case and controversy exists regarding Defendant's infringement of the '875 Patent. 22. To resolve the legal and factual questions raised by plaintiff and to afford relief from the uncertainty and controversy that plaintiff's accusations have precipitated, Old Navy is entitled to a declaratory judgment that it does not infringe and has not infringed PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 8 0 any claim of the '875 patent. ANSWER: Denied. COUNT II – INVALIDITY OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,643,875 23. Old Navy incorporates and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-22 of these counterclaims. ANSWER: Plaintiff incorporates its responses to paragraphs 1-22 above as if fully set forth herein 24. Plaintiff alleges that it is the owner of the '875 patent, and plaintiff has brought suit against Old Navy for infringement of the '875 patent. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits the allegations in paragraph 24 of Defendant's Counterclaim. 25. One or more claims of the '875 patent are invalid under one or more sections of Title 35 of the United States Code, including without limitation 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112 et seq. ANSWER: Denied. 26. An actual case and controversy exists between plaintiff and Old Navy based on plaintiff having filed a Complaint alleging infringement of the '875 patent, and that controversy is ripe for adjudication by this Court. ANSWER: Plaintiff admits an actual case and controversy exists regarding Defendant's infringement of the '875 Patent. 27. To resolve the legal and factual questions raised by plaintiff and to afford relief from the uncertainty and controversy that plaintiff's accusations have precipitated, Old Navy is entitled to a declaratory judgment that one or more claims of the '875 patent are PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 9 0 invalid. ANSWER: Denied. RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff denies all remaining allegations not specifically admitted herein and denies that the Defendants are entitled to any of the relief they have requested. Dated: June 10, 2019 Respectfully Submitted /s/ Raymond W. Mort, III Raymond W. Mort, III Texas State Bar No. 00791308 raymort@austinlaw.com THE MORT LAW FIRM, PLLC 100 Congress Ave, Suite 2000 Austin, Texas 78701 Tel/Fax: (512) 865-7950 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM PAGE | 10