The patent describes a "mobile entertainment and communication device in a palm-held size housing (that) has a cellular or satellite telephone capable of wireless communication with the Internet and one or more replaceable memory card sockets for receiving a blank memory card for recording data directly rom the Internet and, in particular, musical performances that then can be selectively reproduced by the device for the enjoyment of the user, including both audio and visual recordings and reproductions. The device also includes a camera and microphone for recording images and sound within the range of the device that can be wireless transmitted, either selectively or automatically to a remote telephone. Further, the device includes sensors for sensing unusual conditions that may also be transmitted to a remote telephone, together with the location of the device as determined by a GPS section of the device." Minerva's suit alleges that Apple’s infringement has been willful since at least November 20, 2007. The company claims that after receiving notice of the '363 Application, Apple waited until approximately one week before the patent was to issue before sending prior art (the 'Apple Prior Art') that Apple contended rendered the claims of the ‘363 Application invalid. Minerva says that the Patent Office determined that the claims of the ‘363 Application were patentable over the Apple Prior Art (and all of the other prior art that had been submitted), determining for a second time that the claims of the ‘363 Application were valid and patentable over the prior art, and again issued a notice of allowance. Minerva seeks a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants Apple, Inc. and AtlanticRT Inc. to pay Minerva its damages, costs, expenses, and prejudgment and post-judgment interest and cease infringement immediately. Apple has filed for a number of iPhone-related patents, including one for the multitouch keyboard, two for design and trademark, movable interfaces and more. The company has also faced a series of non-patent related iPhone suits, including one that claims the company deliberately misled consumers as to the practical costs of the iPhone.