This case arises under the patent laws of the United States. The plaintiff in this case makes, uses, and sells specialized call-processing and billing equipment and services for correctional and penal institutions, direct local and long-distance call soft switch processing for correctional facilities, value-added telecommunications and cellular technology services such as pre-connection restrictions, digital call recording, jail and inmate management systems, radar systems, video booking, video visitation, investigative services, and other related goods and services. The Defendant also makes, manufactures, uses, and sells specialized telephone call-processing and billing equipment and services for correctional institutions in competition with the plaintiff. The defendant, by making, using, and selling in the United States, without authority, products and services, including its inmate telephone system and inmate telephone services, and other inmate correctional facility related services, including: telephone call processing, video visitation and investigative services, has directly and indirectly infringed (by inducement) and is continuing to infringe, directly and indirectly, on multiple patents held by the plaintiff company. An expert in intellectual property (IP) was sought to opine on the issue.