Professional Documents
Culture Documents
LKQ v. General Motors - Complaint
LKQ v. General Motors - Complaint
“Plaintiffs”), by its attorneys Irwin IP LLC, seek declaratory relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201
and 2202 against Defendants General Motors Company (“GMC”) and GM Global Technology
Operations, LLC (“GM Global”) (collectively “GM” or “Defendants”) and allege as follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff LKQ Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws
of the State of Delaware with its corporate office located at 500 W. Madison Street, Suite 2800,
Chicago, Illinois 60661. LKQ Corporation by and through its subsidiaries import and sell, among
other items, commercially successful automotive replacement and repair parts throughout the
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its corporate office located at 500 W.
Madison Street, Suite 2800, Chicago, Illinois 60661. Keystone is a subsidiary of LKQ Corporation
and distributes aftermarket automotive replacement parts throughout the United States and in this
District.
3. Defendant GMC is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
Detroit, MI 48243. GMC manufactures and distributes vehicles and vehicle parts throughout the
under the laws of the State of Delaware with its offices located at 300 Renaissance Ctr.,
Detroit, MI 48243. On information and belief, Defendant GM Global conducts research and
development for parent GMC. GM Global is the assignee for design patents at issue in this
proceeding.
5. This is a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination that LKQ does not
infringe U.S. Patent Nos. D818,903 (the “’903 Patent”), D803,731 (the “’731 Patent”), and
D812,532 (the “’532 Patent”); and further that the ’532 Patent and U.S. Patent Nos. D786,743 (the
“’743 Patent”); D824825 (the “’825 Patent”); and D840,285 (the “’285 Patent”) are invalid as
anticipated or obvious over the prior art and purport to cover unpatentable subject matter.
Collectively, the ’903 Patent and the ’731 Patent are referred to hereinafter as the Licensed GM
Design Patents, and the ’903 Patent, the’731 Patent, the ’532 Patent, the ’743 Patent, the ’825
Patent, and the ’285 Patent are referred to hereinafter as the GM Design Patents At Issue.
6. This action arises from, on information and belief, affirmative measures taken by
GM to interfere with LKQ’s business operations by asserting that vehicle parts distributed by LKQ
infringe the GM Design Patents At Issue, despite knowing that it has licensed LKQ to sell parts
2
covered the Licensed GM Design Patents, the fact that the ’731 Patent is not infringed by the
allegedly infringing part, and the remaining GM Design Patents At Issue are invalid in light of the
7. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action and the matters pleaded
herein under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because the action arises under the Federal
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, et seq., and the Patent Act of the United States, 35
8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, on information and
belief, Defendants have continuous and systematic contacts with the state of Illinois and this
Judicial District, have affirmatively directed infringement accusations at LKQ in this Judicial
District and communicated such accusations to third parties in the Judicial District, and
omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this Judicial District and Defendants are subject to
STANDING
10. For many decades, LKQ and its predecessors, and others in a vast aftermarket parts
industry, have been importing and offering for sale replacement automotive parts including grilles,
11. LKQ products are of a consistently high quality; LKQ carefully monitors its parts
production with the objective that all replacement parts meet or exceed the quality of the OEM
3
part it replaces. Due to its long-standing presence in the aftermarket industry and its reputation
for quality, LKQ has become a national leader among replacement part providers.
12. GM and LKQ have historically been parties to a confidential Design Patent License
Agreement (“DPLA”) under which LKQ was granted a license to many of GM’s design patents.
LKQ continues to operate in accordance with the DPLA, including paying royalties for parts
13. Where the relationship between the parties was once amicable, GM stopped acting
in accordance with the expectations of the parties when they entered into the DPLA, and the course
14. In the middle of the licensing period, GM also issued a unilateral demand to alter
15. Further, notwithstanding the fact that GM and LKQ were in the midst of direct
and pressure LKQ into agreeing to unfair licensing terms, GM sent correspondence to a third party
making baseless allegations that certain automotive parts sold by LKQ and listed on the third
16. Specifically, on March 1, 2019, GM’s Counsel, Angela Caligiuri, sent a letter to
CCC identifying certain replacement parts it alleged infringed approximately 250 different GM
design patents, including parts sold by LKQ. GM requested that the identified parts be removed
4
17. Despite GM claiming that no aftermarket supplier, including LKQ, was permitted
to manufacture the parts identified in the March 2019 GM Letter, LKQ was indeed licensed to
18. After obtaining a copy of the March 2019 GM Letter, LKQ contacted GM and
discussed with GM that, to the extent it was making allegedly infringing parts, it was licensed to
make the allegedly infringing parts and that it had been paying royalties under the DPLA for such
parts.
PowerPoint presentation to CCC again outlining parts that were allegedly subject to protection
under the GM Design Patents At Issue and that should not be included in CCC’s systems. In other
words, GM asserted that such parts offered by LKQ were infringing its patents. Notably, upon
information and belief and based upon the assumption that CCC’s subsequent request that LKQ
remove certain parts (discussed below) included all parts alleged by GM to be infringing at that
time in March 2020, only four of the approximately 250 patents originally asserted by GM in the
20. On March 4, 2020, CCC sent a letter to LKQ requesting that LKQ remove certain
parts allegedly covered by the GM Design Patents At Issue from CCC’s platform. See Exhibit B
(“March 2020 CCC Letter”). Specifically, CCC directed LKQ to “provide specifics that can be
21. The March 2020 CCC Letter included two patents that GM has licensed LKQ via
22. On information and belief, it was GM who caused and/or directed CCC to request
5
23. LKQ does not infringe the ’903 Patent, the ’731 Patent, or the ’532 Patent. Further,
the ‘532 Patent, ’743 Patent, ’825 Patent, and ’285 Patent are invalid as anticipated or obvious
over the prior art, and purport to cover unpatentable subject matter.
24. By virtue of the foregoing, a substantial controversy exists between the parties that
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
25. The March 2020 CCC Letter identified a number of automotive parts sold by LKQ
on the CCC software platform, which allegedly correspond to the following GM design patents:
While Part GM1230456 was alleged to be covered by the ’743 Patent (which was also alleged to
cover Part GM1036176) in the CCC Letter, LKQ believes that this was in error, and that the
allegedly corresponding GM Patent is the ’532 Patent. Further, Part GM1036176 was listed twice
and was alleged to be covered by the ’261 Patent (also alleged to cover several other parts). LKQ
suspects that the allegedly corresponding patent is the ‘743 Patent. Regardless of LKQ’s
suspicions as to what GM design patent is actually alleged to cover the parts identified, all of the
6
GM Design Patents At Issue were expressly alleged to cover a part offered by LKQ and a case and
Operations, LLC.
27. The ’903 Patent was filed on June 17, 2016 and issued on May 29, 2018. See
Exhibit C.
28. The below comparison illustrates the alleged infringing part compared to the
Ex. C, FIG. 4.
29. LKQ does not infringe the ’903 Patent because LKQ is licensed to the ’903 Patent.
30. Pursuant to the DPLA entered into between GM and LKQ, LKQ is licensed to
patents identified to it by GM. One of those parts is the “Acadia Hood,” with exemplary GM part
7
number 23265062—the corresponding part number for GM part number 23265062 is
GM1230465C.
31. LKQ began offering parts corresponding to the ’903 Patent in accordance with the
DPLA.
32. Since it began offering parts for sale that correspond to the ’903 Patent, LKQ has
properly paid royalties to GM commensurate with the terms and conditions of the LKQ-GM
DPLA. GM has never rejected the royalties paid by LKQ or objected to LKQ paying royalties on
33. GM has not updated the DPLA to indicate to LKQ that it was not licensed to make
34. The ’731 Patent was filed on July 6, 2016, and issued on November 28, 2017. See
Exhibit D.
35. The below comparison illustrates the alleged infringing part compared to the
Ex. D, FIG. 1.
36. LKQ is licensed pursuant to the DPLA to produce the above part.
8
37. GM part number 23159133 is licensed to LKQ, corresponding to the “Acadia
Grille.” GM part number 23159133 corresponds to both part numbers GM1200751 and
Part GM1200751
38. While GM identified the “Acadia Grille” and its corresponding part number as a
licensed part, it identified both “Acadia Grille” and “Acadia Grille Lwr” as corresponding to U.S.
Ex. E, FIG. 1.
39. GM’s failure to expressly identify the ’731 Patent in addition to D813,730 was a
clerical error as evidenced by the fact that GM specifically identified the Acadia Grille and its
9
40. By identifying the Acadia Grille as a licensed vehicle part, GM clearly intended to
grant LKQ a license to the corresponding ’731 Patent, and LKQ understood GM’s designation to
41. LKQ began offering parts corresponding to the “Acadia Grille” as identified by GM
42. Since it began offering parts for sale that correspond to the ’731 Patent, LKQ has
properly paid royalties to GM commensurate with the terms and conditions of the LKQ-GM
DPLA. GM has never rejected the royalties paid by LKQ or objected to LKQ paying royalties on
43. GM has not updated the DPLA to indicate to LKQ that it was not licensed to make
44. The ’532 Patent was filed in the United States on July 28, 2016, claiming priority
to a Korean application filed on February 12, 2016. See Exhibit F. The ’532 Patent issued on
45. The ’532 Patent claims “[t]he ornamental design for a hood panel of car, as shown
and described” and contains the below seven figures and descriptions:
10
Ex. F, FIG. 2. “FIG. 2 is a front elevation
view thereof.” Id. at 1.
Ex. F, FIG 1. “FIG. 1 is a perspective view of
new design for a hood panel of car as shown in
the drawings.” Id. at 1.
11
Ex. F, FIG. 7. “FIG. 7 is a bottom plan view
thereof.”
46. The below comparison illustrates the alleged infringing part compared to the
Ex. F, FIG. 7
12
47. LKQ does not infringe GM’s ’532 Patent because an ordinary observer would not
be confused into thinking that the design of the part and the design covered by the ’532 Patent are
substantially similar.
48. The part produced by LKQ is longer, has a more rounded front edge and less
rounded rear edge than the ’532 Patent. Further, the part produced by LKQ has a more prominent
51. The ’532 Patent is invalid as obvious over the prior art.
52. There are two non-redundant grounds for the unpatentability of the ’532 Patent:
• Obvious over the 2013 Kia Sportage in light of the 2015 Opel Corsa; and
• Obvious over the 2011 Kia Sorento in light of the 2015 Opel Corsa.
53. The 2013 Kia Sportage is a reference that is basically the same as the claimed
design of the ’532 Patent. The below chart compares exemplary images of the 2013 Kia Sportage
13
’532 PATENT 2013 KIA SPORTAGE
Ex. G
Ex. F, FIG 1.
Ex. G
Ex. F, FIG. 2.
Ex. G
Ex. F, FIG. 5.
14
54. The 2013 Kia Sportage was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2013 Kia Sportage were publicly available at least as early as 2012, and it thus
55. Any difference between the ’532 Patent and the 2013 Kia Sportage is suggested by
56. The appearance of the hood of the 2015 Opel Corsa is so related to the 2013 Kia
Sportage that the appearance of features in one would suggest the application to the other:
EX. G EX. H
57. The underside of the 2015 Opel Corsa has a similar overall shape as the 2013 Kia
Sportage.
58. The 2015 Opel Corsa was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2015 Opel Corsa were publicly available at least as early as February 5, 2015,
15
59. As shown below, the additional features of the Opel Corsa combined with the 2013
Kia Sportage would create a design with substantially the same overall visual appearance of the
’532 Patent:
EX. H
Ex. F, FIG. 7.
60. Given the relatedness in designs, an ordinary designer would have been motivated
to combine the 2013 Kia Sportage with the Opel Corsa to arrive at a design that is substantially
62. The 2011 Kia Sorento is a reference that is basically the same as the claimed design
of the ’532 Patent. The below chart compares exemplary images of the 2011 Kia Sorento to the
16
’532 PATENT 2011 KIA SORENTO
Ex. I
Ex. F, FIG. 2.
Ex. I
Ex. F, FIG. 5.
17
63. The 2011 Kia Sorento was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2011 Kia Sorento were publicly available at least as early as 2009, and it thus
64. Any difference between the ’532 Patent and the 2011 Kia Sorento is suggested by
65. The appearance of the hood of the Opel Corsa is so related to the 2011 Kia Sorento
that the appearance of features in one would suggest its application to the other:
EX. I EX. H
66. The underside of the Opel Corsa has a similar overall shape as the 2011 Kia
Sorento.
67. As shown below, the additional features of the Opel Corsa combined with the 2011
Kia Sorento would create a design with substantially the same overall visual appearance of the
’532 Patent:
18
’532 PATENT 2015 OPEL CORSA
EX. H
Ex. F, FIG. 7.
68. Given the relatedness in designs, an ordinary designer would have been motivated
to combine the 2011 Kia Sorento with the Opel Corsa to arrive at a design that is substantially the
70. The ’743 Patent was filed in the United States on December 22, 2015 and issued
on May 16, 2017. See Exhibit J. It was subject to an Ex Parte Quayle Action by the Examiner to
71. The ’743 Patent claims “[t]he ornamental design for a vehicle lower grille, as shown
and described” and contains the below four figures and descriptions:
19
Ex. J, FIG. 2. “FIG. 2 is a front view thereof.”
Id. at 1.
Ex. J, FIG 1. “FIG. 1 is a perspective view of the
vehicle lower grille.” Id. at 1.
72. The broken lines shown in the figures are not claimed. Ex. J, at 1 (“The broken
lines shown depict environment only and form no part of the claimed design.”).
73. The ’743 Patent is invalid as obvious over the prior art.
74. There are three non-redundant grounds that render the ’743 Patent obvious:
• Obvious over U.S. Patent No. D680,921 (“Jara”) in view of the 2014 Ford Fiesta;
75. Jara is a reference that is basically the same design as the ’743 Patent. The below
chart compares the figures of Jara with the figures of the claimed design of the ’743 Patent:
20
’743 PATENT JARA
Ex. J, FIG 1.
Ex. K, FIG 7.
Ex. J, FIG. 4
Ex. K, FIG. 5 (inverted)
21
76. Jara was filed on December 29, 2011, and issued on April 30, 2013, and it thus
77. Any difference between the ’743 Patent and Jara is suggested by the secondary
78. The appearance of the grilles of the 2014 Ford Fiesta is so related to Jara that the
79. The 2014 Ford Fiesta was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2014 Ford Fiesta were publicly available at least as early as May 17, 2014, and
80. As shown below, the additional features of the 2014 Ford Fiesta combined with
Jara would create a design with substantially the same overall visual appearance of the ’743 Patent:
22
’743 PATENT 2014 FORD FIESTA
Ex. J, FIG 1.
Ex. M, at 1.
Ex. J, FIG. 2.
Ex. L, at 1.
81. Given the relatedness in designs, an ordinary designer would have been motivated
to combine Jara with the 2014 Ford Fiesta to arrive at a design that is substantially the same as the
83. As shown above, Jara is basically the same as the claimed design of the ’743 Patent.
23
84. Any difference between the ’743 Patent and Jara is suggested by the 2013 Ford
85. The appearance of the grilles of Jara and the 2013 Ford Fusion are so related that
the existence of features in one would suggest their application to the other:
Ex. N
86. The 2013 Ford Fusion was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2013 Ford Fusion were publicly available at least as early as November 13,
87. As shown below, the additional features of the 2013 Ford Fusion combined with
Jara would create a design with substantially the same overall visual appearance of the ’743 Patent:
24
’743 PATENT 2013 FORD FUSION
Ex. J FIG 1.
Ex. N, at 1.
88. Given the relatedness in designs, an ordinary designer would have been motivated
to combine Jara with the 2013 Ford Fusion to arrive at a design that is substantially the same as
90. As shown above, Jara is basically the same as the ’743 Patent.
91. Any difference between Jara and the ’743 Patent is suggested by the Subaru Legacy
92. The appearance of the grilles of Jara and the Subaru Legacy Concept are so related
that the existence of features in one would suggest their application to the other:
25
JARA SUBARU LEGACY CONCEPT
93. The Subaru Legacy Concept was publicly available, and images of the Subaru
Legacy Concept were publicly available at least as early as November 15, 2013, and it thus
94. As shown below, the additional features of the Subaru Legacy Concept combined
with Jara would create a design with substantially the same overall visual appearance of the ’743
Patent:
Ex. O, at 1.
Ex. J, FIG 1.
26
95. Given the relatedness in the designs, an ordinary designer would have been
motivated to combine Jara with the Subaru Legacy Concept to arrive at a design that is
97. The ’825 Patent was filed in the United States on March 16, 2017 and issued on
98. The ’825 Patent claims “[t]he ornamental design for a vehicle hood, as shown and
27
Ex. P, FIG. 3. “FIG. 3 is a front view thereof.”
Id. at 1.
99. The broken lines shown in the figures are not claimed. Ex. P, at 1 (“The broken
lines in the drawings illustrate portions of the vehicle hood that form no part of the claimed
design.”).
100. The ’825 Patent is invalid as anticipated and/or obvious over the prior art.
101. There are two alternative, non-redundant grounds that render the ’825 Patent
• Obvious over the 2014 SEAT Leon Cupra in view of the Subaru Impreza 5-Door
Concept.
102. The 2011 Buick Regal is a reference that is substantially the same as the ’825
Patent. The below chart compares exemplary images of the 2011 Buick Regal with the figures of
28
’825 PATENT 2011 BUICK REGAL
EX. Q
Ex. P, FIG 1.
Ex. P, FIG. 3.
EX. Q
29
103. The 2011 Buick Regal was publicly available, sold, and purchased by consumers
and images of the 2011 Buick Regal were publicly available at least as early as 2010, and it thus
104. Any difference between the 2011 Buick Regal and the ’825 Patent are de minims.
105. An ordinary observer would believe that the designs of the 2011 Buick Regal hood
107. In the alternative, the ’825 Patent is invalid as obvious over the 2014 Seat Leon
108. The 2014 Seat Leon Cupra is a design that is basically the same as the ’825 Patent.
The below chart is a comparison of exemplary images of the 2014 Seat with the figures of the ’825
Patent:
30
109. The 2014 Seat Leon Cupra was publicly available, sold, and purchased by
consumers and images of the 2014 Seat Leon Cupra were publicly available at least as early as
March 7, 2014, and it thus constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
110. Any difference between the 2014 Seat Leon Cupra and the ’825 Patent is suggested
111. The appearance of the hood of the 2014 Seat Leon Cupra is so related to the hood
of the Subaru Impreza 5-Door Concept that the appearance of features in one would suggest its
EX. R Ex. S
112. As shown below, the additional features of the Subaru 5-Door Concept combined
with the 2014 Seat Leon Cupra would create a design with substantially the same overall visual
31
’825 PATENT SUBARU 5-DOOR CONCEPT
Ex. P, FIG. 3.
Ex. S.
113. The Subaru 5-Door Concept was publicly available, and images of the Subaru 5-
Door Concept were publicly available at least as early as October 29, 2015, and it thus constitutes
114. Given the relatedness of the designs, an ordinary designer would have been
motivated to combine the 2014 Seat Leon Cupra with the Subaru 5-Door Concept to arrive at a
design that is substantially the same as the claimed design of the ’825 Patent.
116. The ’285 Patent was filed in the United States on July 20, 2017 and issued on
117. The ’285 Patent claims “[t]he ornamental design for a vehicle grille bezel, as shown
and described” and contains the below four figures and descriptions:
32
Ex. T, FIG 1. “FIG. 1 is a perspective view of the
vehicle grille bezel.” Id. at 1. Ex. T, FIG. 2. “FIG. 2 is a front view thereof.”
Id. at 1.
Ex. T, FIG. 3. “FIG. 3 is a side view thereof.” Id. Ex. T, FIG. 4. “FIG. 4 is a top view thereof.”
at 1. Id. at 1.
118. The broken lines shown in the figures are not claimed. Ex. T, at 1 (“The broken
lines in the drawings illustrate portions of the vehicle grille bezel that form no part of the claimed
design.”).
119. The ’285 Patent is invalid as anticipated and/or obvious over the prior art.
120. The 2015 Saleen Mustang grille bezel s a reference that is basically the same design
as the ’285 Patent. The below chart compares exemplary images of the 2015 Saleen Mustang with
33
’285 PATENT 2015 SALEEN MUSTANG
Ex. U, FIG 1.
Ex. T, FIG. 2.
121. The 2015 Saleen Mustang was publicly available, sold, and purchased by
consumers and images of the 2015 Saleen Mustang were publicly available at least as early as
August 17, 2015, and it thus constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
122. Any difference between the 2015 Saleen Mustang and the ’285 Patent are de
minims.
123. An ordinary observer would believe that the designs of the 2015 Saleen Mustang
grille bezel and the ’285 Patent are substantially the same.
125. The ’743 Patent; the ’825 Patent; the ’532 Patent; and the ’285 Patent are invalid
because they are designs applied to functionless component parts of a functional whole vehicle,
and therefore empower GM with the ability to improperly subvert the exhaustion doctrine and
prevent consumers from exercising their right to repair their own vehicles.
126. Design patents are limited to “articles of manufacture.” 35. U.S.C. § 171.
34
127. The original meaning of an “article of manufacture” was an article that was
complete in itself, and not a part or sub-part of something that needed further assembly to be
functional.1
128. The ‘743 Patent’ ’825 Patent; ’532 Patent; and ’285 Patent are design patents for
the ornamental designs of, respectively, a vehicle grille, two vehicle hoods, and a vehicle grille
bezel. These are minor, sub-parts of a larger item, the entire vehicle.
129. Patents on these sub-parts contravene the consumer’s right to repair their own
vehicle. The consumer has already purchased a vehicle embodying the design patent for the
grille, hood, or bezel, , and so the consumer also has the right to repair the article that she has
130. As the ’743 Patent; the ’825 Patent; the ’532 Patent; and the ’285 Patent are not
exhaustion and the consumer’s right to repair her vehicle, these patents should be found invalid.
131. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–130 as if fully set forth herein.
132. LKQ does not infringe the ’903 Patent because LKQ is licensed to the ’903 Patent.
1
LKQ believes that there is a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing
existing law or for establishing new law regarding the patentability of functionless component
parts. See, e.g., Sarah Burstein, The “Article of Manufacture” in 1887, 32 BERKELEY TECH.
L.J. 1 (2017), at 5, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2850604 (in 1887,
“article of manufacture” was a term of art that “referred to a tangible item made by humans—other
than a machine or composition of matter—that had a unitary structure and was complete in itself
for use or for sale”).
35
133. As a result of the acts described in the foregoing paragraphs, a substantial
declaratory judgment that LKQ does not infringe the claim of the ’903 Patent.
134. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–133 as if fully set forth herein.
135. LKQ does not infringe the ’731 Patent because LKQ is licensed to the ’731 Patent.
declaratory judgment that LKQ does not infringe the claim of the ’731 Patent.
137. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–136 as if fully set forth herein.
138. LKQ does not infringe the ’532 Patent because the part that LKQ produces is not
within the scope of and does not infringe the claim of the ’532 Patent.
declaratory judgment that LKQ does not infringe the claim of the ’731 Patent.
140. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–139 as if fully set forth herein.
141. The claim of the ’532 Patent is invalid as obvious over the prior art.
142. The claim of the ’532 Patent is further invalid because it is not an “article of
36
143. As a result of the acts described in the foregoing paragraphs, a substantial
144. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–143 as if fully set forth herein.
145. The claim of the ’743 Patent is invalid as obvious over the prior art.
146. The claim of the ’743 Patent is further invalid because it is not an “article of
148. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–147 as if fully set forth herein.
149. The claim of the ’825 Patent is invalid as anticipated and/or obvious over the prior
art.
150. The claim of the ’825 Patent is further invalid because it is not an “article of
152. LKQ realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1–151 as if fully set forth herein.
37
153. The claim of the ’285 Patent is invalid as anticipated and/or obvious over the prior
art.
154. The claim of the ’532 Patent is further invalid because it is not an “article of
a. A declaration that LKQ has not infringed and is not infringing, directly or indirectly, the
b. A declaration that the single claims of the ’532, ’743, ’825, and ’285 Patents are invalid;
c. An order that GM and each of its officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and any persons
in active concert or participation with them are restrained and enjoined from further
prosecuting or instituting any action against LKQ or the purchasers of LKQ’s products
claiming that the alleged patents are infringed or from representing that LKQ’s products or
their use un networks operated by purchasers of those products infringe the alleged patents;
f. Such other relief as this Court or a jury may deem proper and just under the circumstances.
JURY DEMAND
38
Dated: May 6, 2020 Respectfully submitted,
39