UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA -----------------------------------PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,Plaintiff,v.FUJITSU COMPUTER SYSTEMS CORP-ORATION, MATSUSHITA ELECTRICCORPORATION OF AMERICA, NECSOLUTIONS (AMERICA), INC., SONYELECTRONICS INC., TOSHIBA AMERICA,INC., CHARLES H. MOORE, TECHNOLOGYPROPERTIES LTD., and DANIEL E.LECKRONE,Defendants.-----------------------------------X::::::::::::::::::XCivil Action No.C 03 5787 (SBA/WDB)CONSOLIDATED AMENDEDCOMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT [JURY TRIAL DEMANDED]Plaintiff Patriot Scientific Corporation (``Patriot ``), byits attorneys, Bramson, Plutzik, Mahler & Birkhaeuser LLP andBeatie and Osborn LLP, for its Consolidated Amended Complaint(``Complaint``) against defendants Fujitsu Computer SystemsCorporation (``Fujitsu``), Matsushita Electric Corporation of America

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 2

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpd(``Matsushita``), NEC Solutions (America), Inc. (``NEC``), SonyElectronics Inc. (``Sony``), Toshiba America, Inc. (``Toshiba``)(collectively, ``Infringing Defendants``), Charles H. Moore(``Moore``), Technology Properties Ltd. (``TPL``), and Daniel E.Leckrone (``Leckrone``), alleges:1.This is a civil action arising under the Patent Lawsof the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq., for damages andinjunctive relief pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq., and fordeclaratory judgment for determination and correction ofinventorship and ownership of a patent and its family of patentspursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and2202, and 35 U.S.C. §§ 116 and 256.PARTIES2.Plaintiff Patriot is incorporated under the laws ofthe State of Delaware; maintains its principal place of business at10989 Via Frontera, San Diego, California; and is engaged in thebusiness of developing and owning intellectual property, integratedcircuits, and systems level engineering.3.Patriot is the named assignee of United StatesPatent No. 5,809,336 entitled ``HIGH PERFORMANCE MICROPROCESSORHAVING VARIABLE SPEED SYSTEM CLOCK`` (```336 Patent``).4.Defendant Fujitsu maintains its principal place ofbusiness at 1250 East Arques Avenue, M/S 122, Sunnyvale, California94085; and is engaged in the business of, among other things,providing semiconductor products and services for networking,communications, automotive, security, and other markets throughoutthe United States, including the State of California.5.Defendant Matsushita maintains its principal place

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 3

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627283F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdof business at One Panasonic Way, Secaucus, New Jersey; and isengaged in the business of the manufacture and sale of consumer,business, and industrial products in the United States, includingthe State of California.6.Defendant NEC maintains its principal place ofbusiness at 10850 Gold Center Drive, Suite 200, Rancho Cordova,California 95670; and is engaged in the business of the manufactureof communications, computers and electronic components in theUnited States, including the State of California.7.Defendant Sony maintains its principal place ofbusiness at 1 Sony Drive, Park Ridge, New Jersey 07656; and isengaged in the business of, among other things, the manufacture ofaudio, video, communications, and information technology productsfor consumer and professional markets in the United States,including the State of California.8.Defendant Toshiba maintains its principal place ofbusiness at 1251 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York; and isengaged in the business of, among other things, marketing andmanufacturing information and communication systems, electroniccomponents, heavy electrical apparatus, consumer products, andmedical diagnostic imaging equipment in the United States,including the State of California.9.Defendant Moore is an individual, resides at 40Cedar Lane, Sierra City, California, and through his agent hasasserted a claim of partial ownership and co-inventorship of the`336 Patent.10. Defendant TPL maintains its principal place ofbusiness in San Jose, California, is engaged in the business of

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 4

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627284F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdselling and licensing intellectual property, and through its agenthas asserted a claim of partial ownership of the `336 Patent.11. Defendant Leckrone is an individual, is Chairman ofTPL, resides at 4010 Moorpark Avenue, #215, San Jose, California,and has asserted, on behalf of Moore and TPL, a claim of partialownership of the `336 Patent.12. Pursuant to Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of CivilProcedure, on January 28, 2004, Patriot invited Moore, TPL, andLeckrone to join the litigation voluntarily as co-plaintiffs withPatriot; but they declined. Therefore, Patriot has joined them asdefendants. JURISDICTION AND VENUE13. This Court has original jurisdiction over thisaction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because this actionarises under the patent laws of the United States and under theDeclaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.14. As required by Article III of the United StatesConstitution and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, anactual controversy exists between Patriot and defendants Moore,TPL, and Leckrone over the inventorship and ownership of the `336Patent. The proper assertion of these rights are critical to theenforcement of the patent and the validity of the patent.15. Patriot claims sole ownership of all right, title,and interest in the `336 Patent; but through defendant Leckronedefendants Moore, TPL, and Leckrone claim partial inventorship andpartial ownership of the `336 Patent, claim to be co-owners of the`336 Patent with Patriot, and demand compensation for their

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 5

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627285F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdinterest in the `336 Patent. 16. This action is properly venued in this districtunder 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and 1400(b) because defendants reside inor do business in this district; and/or committed acts of patentinfringement in this district.17. In addition, on February 18, 2004, the InfringingDefendants consented by Stipulation to the jurisdiction and venueof this Court. A copy of the Stipulation is attached as Exhibit A.RELATED ACTIONS18. This action is related to the actions titled PatriotScientific Corporation v. Moore, et al., No. C 04 0618 JCS, andIntel Corporation v. Patriot Scientific Corporation, No. C 04 0439JCS, which are pending in the Oakland Division of this district.FACTUAL BACKGROUND19. On September 15, 1998, the Patent and TrademarkOffice issued the `336 Patent naming Moore and Russell H. Fish, III(``Fish``), as inventors and Patriot as assignee. A copy of the `336Patent is attached as Exhibit B.20. Fish solely conceptualized the technology claimed bythe `336 Patent and solely owned the rights, title, and interest inthe `336 Patent. 21. Fish assigned the `336 Patent to the Fish FamilyTrust, the Fish Family Trust assigned the `336 Patent toNanotronics Corporation (``Nanotronics``), and Nanotronics assignedthe `336 Patent to Patriot.22. These assignments were duly recorded in the United

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 6

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627286F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdStates Patent and Trademark Office as follows: Reel/Frame005852/0465, recorded September 26, 1991; Reel/Frame 005978/0672,recorded January 21, 1992; and Reel/Frame 008194/0013, recordedOctober 28, 1996.23. Patriot is therefore sole owner of all right, title,and interest in the `336 Patent, including the right to bring thisaction for injunctive relief and damages.24. Through defendant Leckrone defendants Moore, TPL,and Leckrone have asserted a claim for partial inventorship andpartial ownership of the `336 Patent and claim to be co-owners ofthe `336 Patent with Patriot.25. Through Leckrone, defendants TPL and Leckrone assertthat Moore assigned an ownership interest in the `336 Patent to TPLand Leckrone.26. Patriot disputes the claims of inventorship andownership by Moore and partial ownership by TPL and Leckrone andrequests this Court to resolve the issues of inventorship andownership.27. The Infringing Defendants have made, used, sold,offered to sell, imported, and/or distributed within the UnitedStates, including specifically within the State of California,computers, laptop computers, and/or server systems which includebut are not limited to the following:Fujitsu:C Series;E7000;E2000;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 7

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627287F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdS6000;CELSIUS; and Stylistic ST4000 (``Fujitsu Products``)Matsushita:Toughbook 01;Toughbook 07;Toughbook 18;Toughbook 28;Toughbook 34;Toughbook 48;Toughbook 50;Toughbook 72;Toughbook R1;Toughbook T1;DMR-HS2;DMR-E80H;DMR-E60S;DMR-E30K;DMR-E30S;DMR-E50K; andDMR-E50S (``Matsushita Products``)NEC:Versa LitePad;MobilePro P300;MobilePro 790; and Versa E120 DayLite (``NEC Products``)Sony:VAIO V505A Series;VAIO PCG-GRX700 CTO - LP4M;VAIO PCG-GRX700 CTO - Power;VAIO PCG-GRX700 CTO - Works;VAIO PCG-GRS700 CTO - LP4M;VAIO PCG-GRS700 CTO - Basic;VAIO PCG-GRS700 CTO - Power;VAIO RZ simple;VAIO RZ gamer;VAIO RZ UDL;VAIO W Series;RDR-GX7;DAV-C990; and SLV-D300P (``Sony Products``)Toshiba:Satellite A10;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 8

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627288F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdSatellite A35;Satellite M30;Satellite P10;Satellite P25;Tecra S1;Portege M100;Portege 3500; and Portege R100 (``Toshiba Products``).28. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, andToshiba have made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported, and/ordistributed devices and/or systems which include but are notlimited to the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NEC Products,Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively, in accordancewith the principles and claims of the `336 Patent.FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF[Declaratory Judgment For Determination and Correction of Inventorship]29. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegationscontained in Paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if theywere set forth here in full.30. Patriot disputes the claims of inventorship by Mooreof the `336 Patent and requests this Court to resolve the issue ofinventorship.31. A judicial declaration correcting inventorship ofthe `336 Patent is necessary so that Patriot can enforce its rightswith respect to that patent against the Infringing Defendants.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 9

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627289F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdSECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF[Declaratory Judgment ForDetermination and Correction of Ownership]32. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegationscontained in Paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if theywere set forth here in full.33. Patriot disputes the claims of partial ownership byMoore, TPL, and Leckrone of the `336 Patent and requests this Courtto resolve the issue of ownership.34. A judicial declaration about the ownership of the`336 Patent is necessary so that Patriot can enforce its rightswith respect to that patent against the Infringing Defendants.THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF[Direct Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)]35. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegationscontained in Paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if theywere set forth here in full.36. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, andToshiba have made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported, and/ordistributed within the United States, including specifically withinCalifornia, devices and/or systems which include but are notlimited to the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NEC Products,Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively, and whichdirectly infringe one or more claims of the `336 Patent inviolation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).37. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, and

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 10

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272810F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdToshiba have made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported, and/ordistributed and continue to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import,and/or distribute within the United States, including specificallyCalifornia, devices and/or systems which include but are notlimited to the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NEC Products,Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively, that come withina range of equivalents of the claims of the `336 Patent, andtherefore infringe one or more claims of the `336 Patent.38. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, andToshiba have made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported, and/ordistributed within the United States, including specificallyCalifornia, infringing devices and/or systems which include but arenot limited to the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NECProducts, Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively,without authority or license from Patriot, and in violation ofPatriot`s rights, and therefore infringe the `336 Patent.39. The unlawful infringing activity by the InfringingDefendants is continuing and will continue unless enjoined by thisCourt.40. The Infringing Defendants have had actual knowledgeof the `336 Patent and have willfully, deliberately, andintentionally infringed the claims of the `336 Patent.41. The acts of infringement by the InfringingDefendants have damaged Patriot and unless the infringement isenjoined by this Court, plaintiff will suffer further damage.42. The amount of money damages suffered by Patriot from

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 11

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272811F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdthe acts of infringement by Infringing Defendants cannot bedetermined without discovery, and is, therefore, subject to proofat trial. 43. Patriot is entitled to a complete accounting of allrevenue derived by the Infringing Defendants from the unlawfulconduct alleged in this Complaint. In addition, the harm toPatriot from the Infringing Defendants` acts of infringement is notfully compensable by money damages. 44. Patriot has suffered, and continues to suffer,irreparable harm, has no adequate remedy at law, and will continueto suffer irreparable harm unless the Infringing Defendants`conduct is enjoined. Patriot, therefore, also requests apreliminary injunction and a permanent injunction at the entry ofjudgment, to prevent additional infringement.FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF[Inducement of Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b)]45. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegationscontained in Paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if theywere set forth here in full.46. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, andToshiba have actively induced, and are now inducing, infringementof the `336 Patent by selling within the United States, includingspecifically California, devices and/or systems which include butare not limited to the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NECProducts, Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively, andteaching users to use those devices and/or systems in a manner

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 12

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272812F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdwhich infringes one or more claims of the `336 Patent in violationof 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).47. The Infringing Defendants have unlawfully derived,and continue to derive, income and profits by inducing others toinfringe the `336 Patent; and Patriot has suffered, and continuesto suffer, damages because of the Infringing Defendants` inducementto infringe the `336 Patent.48. Patriot has suffered, and will continue to suffer,irreparable damage for which it has no adequate remedy at lawbecause of the Infringing Defendants` inducement of others toinfringe the `336 Patent, and will continue to be harmed unless theInfringing Defendants are enjoined from further acts of inducement.FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF[Contributory Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c)]49. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegationscontained in Paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if theywere set forth here in full.50. Defendants Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC, Sony, andToshiba have offered to sell or have sold within the United Statescomponents of the Fujitsu Products, Matsushita Products, NECProducts, Sony Products, and Toshiba Products, respectively,claimed in the `336 Patent, and apparatus for use in practicing theprocesses claimed in the `336 Patent. 51. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(c), the componentsand apparatus constitute a material part of the inventions in the`336 Patent and were especially made or especially adapted for use

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 13

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272813F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdin an infringement of the `336 Patent and were not a staple articleor commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringinguses.52. The Infringing Defendants will continue tocontribute to the infringement of the `336 Patent unless enjoinedby this Court.53. The Infringing Defendants have derived, and continueto derive, unlawful profits by contributing to the infringement ofthe `336 Patent, and Patriot has suffered, and continues to suffer,damages because of the Infringing Defendants` contributoryinfringement of the `336 Patent.54. Patriot has suffered, and will continue to suffer,irreparable harm because of the Infringing Defendants` contributoryinfringement of the `336 Patent, unless the Infringing Defendantsare enjoined from further contributory infringement.PRAYER FOR RELIEFWHEREFORE, plaintiff Patriot respectfully prays for anorder:(a) adjudging Fish the sole inventor of the `336 Patent;(b) adjudging Patriot the sole owner of the `336 Patent;(c) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 116 and 256, directing theDirector of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to issuecertificates correcting the inventorship and ownership of the `336Patent;(d) adjudging U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336 valid,enforceable, and infringed by the Infringing Defendants;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 14

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272814F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpd(e) permanently enjoining the Infringing Defendants,their representatives, assignees or successors, or anysubsidiaries, divisions, agents, servants, employees of thedefendant, and/or those in privity with the Infringing Defendantsfrom infringing, contributing to the infringement of, and inducinginfringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336, and for all further andproper injunctive relief pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;(f) directing the Infringing Defendants to account forall revenue derived from the unlawful conduct alleged in thisComplaint;(g) awarding plaintiff Patriot monetary damages from theInfringing Defendants for past infringement, including but notlimited to a reasonable royalty, plus applicable pre- and post-judgment interest, and costs to which plaintiff is entitled under35 U.S.C. § 284, as well as attorneys` fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C.§ 285 or other applicable law;(h) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, awarding up to trebledamages for willful, deliberate, and intentional infringement bythe Infringing Defendants; and (i) granting any other relief this Court deems just andproper under the circumstances.JURY TRIAL DEMANDPlaintiff respectfully requests a trial by jury on alltriable issues pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of CivilProcedure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 15

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272815F:\CLIENT\Patriot Scientific (1133.0001)\Consolidated Am ended Complaint.wpdDated: March 10, 2004BRAMSON, PLUTZIK, MAHLER &BIRKHAEUSER, LLPBy:___________________________Alan R. PlutzikDaniel E. BirkhaeuserL. Timothy Fisher2125 Oak Grove Road, Suite 120Walnut Creek, California 94598Telephone: (925) 945-0200Facsimile: (925) 945-8792BEATIE AND OSBORN LLPRussel H. Beatie(Admitted pro hac vice)Curt D. Marshall(Admitted pro hac vice)Attorneys for Plaintiff521 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400New York, New York 10175Telephone: (212) 888-9000Facsimile: (212) 888-9664Of Counsel: John E. Lynch(Admitted pro hac vice)