Securus Technologies Inc v. Global Tel*Link Corporation

Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, MOTION for More Definite Statement

N.D. Tex.July 20, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC, Plaintiff, v. GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION Defendant. No. 3:16-cv-01338-K (JURY DEMANDED) GTL’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, ALTERNATVELY, FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(e), defendant Global Tel*Link Corporation (“GTL”) moves to dismiss the patent infringement complaint asserted by plaintiff Securus Technologies, Inc. (“Securus”), for failure to state a claim. In the alternative, GTL moves for a more definite statement. Securus’s complaint alleges that GTL directly infringes four patents. In the wake of the abrogation of Form 18 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Securus’s complaint must state a plausible claim for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. Pursuant to Rule 8, plaintiffs claiming direct infringement must plead, inter alia, sufficient facts to identify the specific features of the accused products alleged to infringe the claims of the asserted patents and to describe how the accused products practice the elements of those claims. Securus’s complaint relies exclusively on legal conclusions by merely parroting the patents’ claim language. Securus does not point to any specific features or components of GTL’s products as infringing. And Securus does not state how GTL’s products practice the elements of Case 3:16-cv-01338-K Document 15 Filed 07/20/16 Page 1 of 4 PageID 126 DEFENDANT GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION’S PAGE 2 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT the claims. Securus’s complaint thus fails to state a plausible claim that GTL infringes any of the asserted patents, and GTL is entitled to dismissal of the complaint. Alternatively, in the event the Court does not dismiss the complaint, it should order Securus to amend its complaint to identify the specific features of GTL’s products or services alleged to infringe and to describe how GTL’s products or services practice the elements of the patents’ claims. GTL respectfully requests oral argument on this motion to the extent that the Court believes oral argument would aid in considering the motion. These grounds for dismissal are set forth with more particularity in GTL’s brief in support of its motion. Case 3:16-cv-01338-K Document 15 Filed 07/20/16 Page 2 of 4 PageID 127 DEFENDANT GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION’S PAGE 3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Dated: July 20, 2016 Respectfully submitted, /s/ J.C. Rozendaal J.C. Rozendaal (pro hac vice) Michael E. Joffre (pro hac vice) Katherine C. Cooper (pro hac vice) KELLOGG, HUBER, HANSEN, TODD, EVANS & FIGEL, P.L.L.C. 1615 M Street, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: (202) 326-7900 Fax: (202) 326-7999 E. Leon Carter Texas State Bar No. 03914300 lcarter@carterscholer.com Linda R. Stahl Texas State Bar No. 00798525 lstahl@carterscholer.com CARTER SCHOLER ARNETT HAMADA & MOCKLER PLLC 8150 N. Central Expressway Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75206 Tel: (214) 550-8188 Fax: (214) 550-8185 Counsel for Defendant Global Tel*Link Corporation CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I hereby certify that counsel for GTL attempted to reach Securus’s counsel on July 20, 2016, but were unable to do so. In light of the July 20, 2016, answer deadline in this case, counsel for GTL is filing this Motion without a conference. /s/ Katherine C. Cooper Case 3:16-cv-01338-K Document 15 Filed 07/20/16 Page 3 of 4 PageID 128 DEFENDANT GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION’S PAGE 4 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 20, 2016, Defendant electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court, using the CM/ECF system, which will send certification of such filing to all counsel of record. /s/ J.C. Rozendaal Case 3:16-cv-01338-K Document 15 Filed 07/20/16 Page 4 of 4 PageID 129 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC, Plaintiff, v. GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § No. 3:16-cv-01338-K (JURY DEMANDED) [PROPOSED] ORDER ON DEFENDANT GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Upon consideration of Defendant Global Tel*Link Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim or, in the Alternative, for More Definite Statement, the opposition thereto, and the materials relied upon therein, the Court finds that the motion to dismiss should be GRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Securus Technologies, Inc.’s civil action brought against Defendant Global Tel*Link Corporation is hereby dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED, this _____ day of ____________________, 2016. _____________________ THE HONORABLE ED KINKEADE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case 3:16-cv-01338-K Document 15-1 Filed 07/20/16 Page 1 of 1 PageID 130