Amazon.com 2015 Annual Report Download - page 70

60
compensable working time under the federal wage and hour statute. In February 2015, the courts in those actions alleging only
federal law claims entered stipulated orders dismissing those actions without prejudice. We dispute any remaining allegations
of wrongdoing and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in these matters.
In September 2013, Personalized Media Communications, LLC filed a complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon
Web Services, LLC in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges, among other things,
that the use of certain Kindle devices, Kindle apps and/or Amazon.com, Inc.’s website to purchase and receive electronic media
infringes nine U.S. Patents: Nos. 5,887,243, 7,801,304, 7,805,749, 7,940,931, 7,769,170, 7,864,956, 7,827,587, 8,046,791, and
7,883,252, all entitled “Signal Processing Apparatus And Methods.” The complaint also alleges, among other things, that
CloudFront, S3, and EC2 web services infringe three of those patents, Nos. 7,801,304, 7,864,956, and 7,827,587. The
complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages, interest, and injunctive relief. In August 2015, the court invalidated all
asserted claims of all asserted patents and dismissed the case with prejudice. In September 2015, Personalized Media appealed
that judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. We dispute the allegations of wrongdoing and
intend to defend ourselves vigorously in this matter.
In November 2013, Memory Integrity, LLC filed a complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. for patent infringement in the
United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges, among other things, that certain Kindle devices
infringe U.S. Patent No. 7,296,121, entitled “Reducing Probe Traffic In Multiprocessor Systems.” The complaint seeks an
unspecified amount of damages, costs, expenses, and interest. In December 2014, the case was stayed pending resolution of
review petitions filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. We dispute the allegations of wrongdoing and intend
to defend ourselves vigorously in this matter.
In December 2013, Appistry, Inc. filed a complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, Inc. for patent
infringement in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The complaint alleges, among other things,
that Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 8,200,746, entitled “System And Method For Territory-Based
Processing Of Information,” and 8,341,209, entitled “System And Method For Processing Information Via Networked
Computers Including Request Handlers, Process Handlers, And Task Handlers.” The complaint seeks injunctive relief, an
unspecified amount of damages, treble damages, costs, and interest. In March 2015, the case was transferred to the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington. In July 2015, the court granted our motion for judgment on the
pleadings and invalidated the patents-in-suit. In August 2015, the court entered judgment in our favor. In September 2015, the
plaintiff appealed that judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and filed a new complaint against
Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.
The 2015 complaint alleges, among other things, that Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud, Simple Workflow, and Herd infringe
U.S. Patent Nos. 8,682,959, entitled “System And Method For Fault Tolerant Processing Of Information Via Networked
Computers Including Request Handlers, Process Handlers, And Task Handlers,” and 9,049,267, entitled “System And Method
For Processing Information Via Networked Computers Including Request Handlers, Process Handlers, And Task Handlers.”
The 2015 complaint seeks injunctive relief, an unspecified amount of damages, treble damages, costs, and interest. We dispute
the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in these matters.
In March 2014, Kaavo, Inc. filed a complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, Inc. for patent
infringement in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges, among other things, that
Amazon Web Services’ Elastic Beanstalk and CloudFormation infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,271,974, entitled “Cloud Computing
Lifecycle Management For N-Tier Applications.” The complaint seeks injunctive relief, an unspecified amount of damages,
costs, and interest. In June 2015, the case was stayed pending resolution of a motion for judgment on the pleadings in a related
case. In July 2015, Kaavo Inc. filed another complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, Inc. in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware. The 2015 complaint alleges, among other things, that CloudFormation
infringes U.S. Patent No. 9,043,751, entitled “Methods And Devices For Managing A Cloud Computing Environment.” The
2015 complaint seeks injunctive relief, an unspecified amount of damages, enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and
interest. In January 2016, the 2015 case was stayed pending resolution of a motion for judgment on the pleadings. We dispute
the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in these matters.
In December 2014, Smartflash LLC and Smartflash Technologies Limited filed a complaint against Amazon.com, Inc.,
Amazon.com, LLC, AMZN Mobile, LLC, Amazon Web Services, Inc. and Audible, Inc. for patent infringement in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges, among other things, that Amazon Appstore,
Amazon Instant Video, Amazon Music, Audible Audiobooks, the Amazon Mobile Ad Network, certain Kindle and Fire devices,
Kindle e-bookstore, Amazon’s proprietary Android operating system, and the servers involved in operating Amazon Appstore,
Amazon Instant Video, Amazon Music, the Fire TV app, Audible Audiobooks, Cloud Drive, Cloud Player, Amazon Web
Services, and Amazon Mobile Ad Network infringe seven related U.S. Patents: Nos. 7,334,720; 7,942,317; 8,033,458;
8,061,598; 8,118,221; 8,336,772; and 8,794,516, all entitled “Data Storage and Access Systems.” In May 2015, the case was
stayed until further notice. The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages, an injunction, enhanced damages,
attorneys’ fees, costs, and interest. We dispute the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in this
matter.