Case 1:15-cv-03181-SCJ Document 13 Filed 12/07/15 Page 2 of 48

Plaintiff’s hardware and software systems suffered from serious design flaws and
other defects that caused extensive failure rates, which in turn resulted in
significant economic harm to Plaintiff’s customers, unnecessary disruptions to the
lives of individuals who wore Plaintiff’s equipment, and tremendous exposure to,
not only corporate consumers, but also to Governmental entities that utilized and
relied on Defendant’s products and services.
Having been advised that one of its largest customers was contemplating
litigation and intended to move its business, and apparently fearing the negative
publicity and potential governmental and business consequences1 associated with
such an action, Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit. Plaintiff contends a document
(Exhibit A), which is on its face incomplete and unsigned by three of the four
named Defendants, somehow governs this dispute. Incredibly, Plaintiff now
contends it was somehow duped into transacting business with a subsidiary of
Defendant Services (Libre by Nexus, Inc.)(“Libre”), even though for more than a
year Plaintiff engaged in extensive (sometimes daily) business communications
with Libre personnel on Libre-branded stationary, made shipments of goods to

1

Upon information and belief, at least one major law enforcement agency in
Southern California terminated its relationship with Omnilink due to massive
hardware and/or software failures.
2

 Case 1:15-cv-03181-SCJ Document 13 Filed 12/07/15 Page 29 of 48

31. As Libre’s problems with equipment mounted, Omnilink knew that its
customers, including but not limited to Programs and Libre had experienced
massive software and firmware and product defects and failures such as
inoperative charging devices, software that would drop (and not reset)
signals between cell towers, and other flaws that would make the electronic
tracking service unavailable for large numbers of individuals.
32. At certain points in time between June 2014 and August 2015 Libre
experienced a product defect rate for Omnilink-supplied equipment and
software in excess of 50%.
33. Omnilink initially refused to admit that the equipment or software that it
supplied was defective in an effort to induce Libre to purchase more
products and services.
34. On or about early 2015 and continuing through July of 2015, Omnilink
advised Libre and Services that it had developed software and firmware
solutions to fix the massive failure rate in an effort to induce Libre to
purchase more of its products and services. In fact, Omnilink had actual
knowledge that it could not resolve the technical issues that caused the
product and service defects which Libre was experiencing.

29

 Case 1:15-cv-03181-SCJ Document 13 Filed 12/07/15 Page 31 of 48

40. Following Omnilink’s acquisition, Omnilink intermittently refused to
respond to Libre’s requests for technical assistance until Libre made
payments for devices that included defective equipment. See for example,
Counterclaim-Plaintiff’s Exhibit 3.
B. Omnilink’s Failure or Refusal to Correct Defective Equipment
and Software
41. A substantial percentage of the equipment provided by Omnilink failed to
function in conformity with the terms of the Lease Agreement.
42. Focalpoint repeatedly and consistently failed to operate in conformity with
the representations of Omnilink and in conformity with the documentation
provided by Omnilink.
43. The electronic monitoring devices provided by Omnilink were generally
accompanied by a series of component parts necessary to ensure the
functionality of the devices, including, but not limited to, Omnilink’s
proprietary power cords, charger batteries, back plates, straps, and pins.
44. A substantial percentage of the power cords provided by Omnilink failed to
properly charge their accompanied electronic monitoring devices, leaving
those devices inoperable and Services incapable of providing geophysical
monitoring for the impacted end user. Moreover, the failure of the power
cords meant that individuals who were required to wear and recharge the
31

 Case 1:15-cv-03181-SCJ Document 13 Filed 12/07/15 Page 32 of 48

power cords were left “tethered” to charging stations for hours a time,
which was disruptive to their daily lives.
45. Services repeatedly provided verbal and written notice to Omnilink
concerning the malfunctioning power cords.
46. Omnilink

received

Services’

repeated

notices

concerning

the

malfunctioning power cords.
47. Services repeatedly requested that Omnilink repair or replace the
malfunctioning power cords.
48. Omnilink repeatedly agreed to repair or replace the malfunctioning power
cords.
49. Omnilink failed to replace or repair the malfunctioning power cords.
50. A significant percentage of the charger batteries accompanying the
electronic monitoring devices provided by Omnilink failed to function
properly, leaving the affected device inoperable and Services incapable of
providing geophysical monitoring for the impacted end user.
51. Services repeatedly provided verbal and written notice to Omnilink
concerning the malfunctioning charger batteries.
52. Omnilink

received

Services’

malfunctioning charger batteries.

32

repeated

notices

concerning

the