Blackberry 2013 Annual Report Download - page 50

U.S. Patent No. 5,506,981 generally directed to an accelerator board for enhancing computer system performance. The pro se
complaint sought monetary damages and other relief that the court deemed just and proper. On February 20, 2013 the court dismissed
the case without prejudice for lack of standing.
On December 28, 2012, Callwave Communications, LLC. (“Callwave”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Delaware. Callwave asserted that the Company infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 6,771,970 and 7,907,933 generally
directed to locating mobile devices and processing a payment over a network, respectively. The complaint seeks monetary damages
and other relief that the court deems just and proper. A scheduling conference has not been scheduled. Proceedings are ongoing.
On January 4, 2013, Steelhead Licensing LLC (“Steelhead”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware. Steelhead asserted that the Company infringes U.S. Patent No. 5.491,834 generally directed to determining the
manner for performing a handover between base stations in a network. The complaint seeks monetary damages, an injunction, and
other relief that the court deems just and proper. On February 11, 2013 Plaintiff filed an amended complaint adding an allegation of
inducement. A scheduling conference has not been scheduled. Proceedings are ongoing.
On February 22, 2013, Maz Encryption Technologies LLC (“Maz”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Delaware. Maz asserted that the Company infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,185,681 generally directed to encryption for an
electronic document management system. The complaint seeks an injunction, monetary damages, and other relief that the court deems
j
ust and proper. A scheduling conference has not been scheduled. Proceedings are ongoing.
On March 15, 2013, Rembrandt Wireless Technologies, LP (“Rembrandt”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall Division). Rembrandt asserted that the Company infringes U.S. Patent
No. 8,023,580 generally directed to communication using at least two modulation methods. The complaint seeks an injunction,
monetary damages, and other relief that the court deems just and proper.
Between May and August 2011, several purported class action lawsuits were filed against the Company and certain of its present or
former officers in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, two of which have been voluntarily dismissed. On
January 6, 2012, Judge Richard S. Sullivan consolidated the remaining three actions and appointed both lead plaintiff and counsel. On
April 5, 2012, plaintiff filed the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, alleging that during the period from December 16,
2010 through June 16, 2011, the Company and certain of its officers made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company’s financial condition and business prospects, and seek unspecified damages. Defendants have brought a motion to dismiss
the claim with prejudice, and filed its materials on June 4, 2012. Plaintiff filed its responding brief on August 3, 2012. Defendants
filed their reply brief on September 4, 2012. The Company’s motion to dismiss was argued on October 25, 2012 with judgment
reserved. Proceedings are ongoing.
43