I did this to help me understand what the new pacer was addressing ....hope it helps someone else

 The blue is our response today to their counterclaim

 

COUNTERCLAIM
Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff NEC Electronics America, Inc. alleges its Counterclaim as follows:
1. Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff NEC Electronics America, Inc. (“NEC Electronics”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and maintains a principal place of business in Santa Clara, California.

1. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis admit the allegations of Paragraph 1.

2. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Technology Properties Limited (“TPL”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and maintains a principal place of business in San Jose, California.

2. Plaintiffs admit that Technology Properties Limited is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. Except as expressly admitted herein, Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations of Paragraph 2.

3. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Patriot Scientific Corporation (“Patriot”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Delaware and maintains a principal place of business in San Diego, California.

3. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 3.
4. NEC Electronics asserts a Counterclaim for declaratory relief under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35, United States Code, in particular, Sections 271 and 285. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Counterclaim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a), 2201 and 2202.4. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 4 for jurisdiction purposes only.

5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

5. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 5 for venue purposes only.

6. In their Second Amended Complaint, TPL and Patriot (“Plaintiffs”) allege that they (along with Charles Moore) are the owners of the right, title and interest to the ‘148, ‘336 and ‘584 patents and that TPL has the exclusive right to enforce and license these patents. Plaintiffs further allege that NEC Electronics has infringed the ‘148, ‘336 and ‘584 patents.

6. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 6 as they relate to U.S. Patent Nos. 5,809, 336 and 6,598,148. With regard to the allegations relating to U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584, Plaintiffs aver that no response is required in light of the parties' Stipulation of Partial Judgment and the Court's Order thereon dated September 12, 2007.

7. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and NEC Electronics by virtue of the allegations in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint in this action.

7. Plaintiffs admit the allegations of Paragraph 7.

8. The ‘148, ‘336, and/or ‘584 patents are invalid for failure to comply with one or more of the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103, 112, and/or 133.

8. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 8.

9. NEC Electronics has not directly infringed, contributorily infringed, or induced infringement of any valid and enforceable claim of the ‘148, ‘336 and/or ‘584 patents. 10. The ‘148 and/or ‘336, patents are unenforceable for the reasons stated in paragraphs 66 – 82 of NEC Electronics’ First Amended Answer to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, which paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully herein.

9. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 9.
10. Plaintiffs deny the allegations of Paragraph 10.
11. This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285, entitling NEC Electronics to an award of its attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs in this action.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff NEC Electronics prays for:
A. A judgment dismissing the Second Amended Complaint with prejudice.
B. A judgment providing that Plaintiffs shall not be awarded any relief on their Second Amended Complaint, including without limitation, any award of damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and/or injunctive relief.
C. A judgment declaring each claim of the ‘148, ‘336 and ‘584 patents invalid.
D. A judgment declaring unenforceable each of the ‘148 and ‘336 patents.
E. A judgment declaring that NEC Electronics has not directly infringed, contributorily infringed, or induced infringement of any valid and enforceable claim of the ‘148, ‘336 and ‘584 patents.
F. A judgment deeming this to be an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and awarding NEC Electronics its attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs in this action.
G. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.11. Plaintiffs deny that this Counterclaim is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. 285, entitling NEC Electronics to an award of its attorneys' fees, expenses and costs in this action.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, TPL respectfully requests judgment of the Court against NEC Electronics as follows:
a. a declaration that NEC Electronics' accused products infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 6,598,148 and 5,809, 336;
b. a declaration that U.S. Patent Nos. 6,598,148 and 5,809, 336 are not invalid;
c. a declaration that U.S. Patent Nos. 6,598,148 and 5,809, 336 are not unenforceable;
d. an award of attorney's fees and costs; and
e. such other costs and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.
DATED: October 3, 2007