infringing Claim 1 of the ’108 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271,

et seq. , by

making, using, offering for sale, selling in the United States and/or importing into

the United States without authority, the accused products identified above. Claim

1 of the ’108 patent teaches a method of memory management for a non-volatile

storage medium. The method comprises several steps, which generally involves,

without limitation, writing electronic data segments from volatile, temporary

memory to a non-volatile, long-term storage medium by linking data segments

according to a number of specified steps.

12. Plaintiff alleges that at least as of the date of the filing of the

originally filed complaint in this matter, if not sooner, Intel knew or should have

known of the existence of Claim 1 of the ’108 patent and the fact that the accused

products infringe said Claim 1.

13. Plaintiff alleges that Intel sold, sells, offers to sell, ships, or otherwise

delivers the accused products to customers or end-users with all the features

required to infringe Claim 1 of the ’108 patent. Upon information and belief, Intel

knows that the accused products infringe Claim 1 of the ‘108 patent and intends to

induce third parties to include its customers and end-users to also infringe Claim 1

of the ‘108 patent.

14. Upon information and belief, the accused products, alone or in

combination with other products, directly or, alternatively, under the doctrine of

equivalents practice each of the limitations of independent Claim 1 of the ’108

patent when they are used for their normal and intended purpose of writing to and

storing electronic data on non-volatile memory. Thus, Intel directly infringes

Claim 1 of the ’108 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) when it demonstrates,

tests or otherwise uses the accused products in the United States. By way of

example, Intel’s demonstration and How-To videos, posted by Intel on Intel’s

website(s) or other public websites, show Intel and/or its authorized agents or

employees migrating or transferring data from the memory of one or more devices

to one or more of the accused products. An example can be found on Intel’s

YouTube channel at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE7yGQbSplU. Such

conduct evidences Intel’s act of direct infringement of Claim 1 of the ’108 patent.

15. Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Intel uses, makes, sells,

offers to sell and/or imports the accused products knowing that they will be used

by its customers and end-users for writing and storing electronic data to nonvolatile

memory utilizing the steps described in Claim 1 of the ’108 patent. Intel’s

product literature and instructional videos advertise and encourage customers to

use the accused product(s) to store electronic data in the accused products utilizing

the methods of memory management taught by Claim 1 of the ’108 patent and in a

manner it knows infringes upon Claim 1 of the ’108 patent.

16. Intel also provides operating manuals, installation guides,

instructional and “how-to” videos, webcasts, or other instructional material that

instruct customers and end-users on how to connect the accused products and use

them as non-volatile storage devices for electronic data. Among other things,

Intel’s informational materials lay out step-by-step instructions on how to write

data into the memory of the accused products – a process that utilizes the method

disclosed in Claim 1 of the ’108 patent and which Intel knows (at the least as of the

filing of the original complaint if not sooner) infringes the method taught in Claim

1 of the ’108 patent. Plaintiff believes that Intel directs consumers and end-users to

consult and utilize such instructional videos and other informational material.

17. Plaintiff believes and thereupon alleges that Intel is aware that its

customers and end-users are using the accused products in an infringing manner

based on, among other things: 1) the discussions, questions, answers, and/or

comments posted on its “Intel Support Community” website where Intel’s

authorized agents, customers and/or end-users discuss and disclose the use of the

accused products for non-volatile electronic data storage, a process which Intel

knows infringes upon Claim 1 of the ’108 patent; and/or 2) the fact that Intel

encourages its customers and end-users to use the accused products in an

infringing manner as set forth in the preceding Paragraphs.

18. As alleged above, incorporated herewith, and based upon information

and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Intel, without authority, has induced and continues

to induce infringement of the ’108 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b)

inasmuch as:

a. The accused products infringe Claim 1 during the normal use of

the accused products by Intel’s customers and/or end-users;

b. Intel has known and has been continuously aware of the ’108

patent since at least the filing of the original complaint in this

action, if not sooner;

c. Intel has acted in a manner that encourages and continues to

encourage others to infringe Claim 1 of the ’108 patent by, among

other things, intentionally instructing and/or encouraging

customers and end-users to use the accused products in a manner

that Intel knows or should have known would cause them to

infringe the ’108 patent;

d. Intel sells, distributes, and supplies the accused products to

customers and end-users with the intent that the products be used

in an infringing manner;

e. Intel provides operating manuals, installation guides, instructional

videos, webcasts, or other instructional material designed to

instruct customers and end-users to use the products in an

infringing manner; and,

f. Intel advertises, markets, and promotes the use of the accused

products in an infringing manner.

19. As alleged above, incorporated herewith, and based upon information

and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Intel has contributed and continues to contribute to