Free Notice to Take Deposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00057-MPT

Document 153

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE VENETEC INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff, vs. NEXUS MEDICAL, LLC, Defendant. NEXUS MEDICAL, LLC'S SECOND NOTICE OF DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6) TO VENETEC INTERNATIONAL, INC. To: Venetec International, Inc c/o MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP 1201 N. Market Street Wilmington, DE 19801 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Nexus Medical, LLC ("Nexus") will take the deposition upon oral examination of Plaintiff Venetec International, Inc. ("Venetec"), by or through one or more of Venetec's officers, directors, managing agents or other persons who consent to testify on Venetec's behalf concerning the topics of testimony specified in Attachment A, commencing on June 4, 2008, beginning at 9 A.M., or at such other time as may be mutually agreed upon by counsel for the parties. The deposition will continue from day to day until completed. The deposition will take place at the offices of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, 303 Peachtree Street Suite 5300, Atlanta, GA 30308, or at such other place as may be mutually agreed upon by counsel for the parties. Prior to the deposition, Venetec is requested to designate in writing to Nexus the name(s) of the person(s) who will testify on its behalf concerning the areas of testimony specified in Attachment A, and for each written designation, Venetec is requested to specify in writing the matter(s) to which that person will testify. C.A. NO. 07-57 (MPT)

Case 1:07-cv-00057-MPT

Document 153

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 4

The deposition will be taken before a court reporter or other person authorized to administer oaths, and will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This deposition is for the purpose of discovery and evidentiary use at the trial or any hearing for this matter, and for any other purpose permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and may be recorded by stenographic and video means. You are invited to attend and exercise your rights under the Rules.

Date: May 9, 2008

/s/ Richard K. Herrmann Richard K. Herrmann #405 Mary B. Matterer #2696 Amy Arnott Quinlan #3021 MORRIS JAMES LLP 500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-1494 302-888-6800 [email protected] Patrick A. Lujin (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Robert T. Adams (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) SHOOK HARDY & BACON L.L.P 2555 Grand Boulevard Kansas City, MO 64108 816-474-6550 Peter A. Strand (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) SHOOK HARDY & BACON L.L.P. Hamilton Square 600 14th Square, NW, Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005-2004 202-783-8400 Robert H. Reckers (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) SHOOK HARDY & BACON L.L.P. JPMorgan Chase Tower 600 Travis Street, Suite 1600 Houston, Texas 77002-2911 713-227-8008

_

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF NEXUS MEDICAL, LLC

2

Case 1:07-cv-00057-MPT

Document 153

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 4

ATTACHMENT A DEFINITIONS Nexus incorporates herein the Definitions set forth in Nexus's Third Set of Requests for Production of Documents and Things to Plaintiff Venetec International, Inc., served on May 2, 2008. TOPICS FOR EXAMINATION 1. products. 2. Identification of all past and present Venetec products that compete in the Identification of all Venetec products that compete with each of Nexus'

market for catheter securement devices. 3. securement devices. 4. 5. Venetec's competitors in the market for catheter securement devices. Venetec's strategy for competing with competitors in the market for Venetec's market share in the United States in the market for catheter

catheter securement devices. 6. All statements Venetec has made to any person, including investors or

financial analysts, regarding Nexus or the instant litigation. 7. The basis for Venetec's allegation that it is entitled to damages for Nexus'

alleged infringement of the Patents-in-Suit. 8. The type of damages Venetec seeks from Nexus and the reasons such

damages are allegedly warranted. 9. All considerations relevant to your contention that you are entitled to a

reasonable royalty, including all factors relevant to the determination of a reasonable royalty amount. 10. Any license agreements that involve patents that you contend are 3

Case 1:07-cv-00057-MPT

Document 153

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 4

comparable to any of the Patents-in-Suit. 11. The identity and terms of prior existing licenses relevant to the calculation

of a reasonable royalty, including licensing terms for the Patents-in-Suit or comparable patents. 12. 13. Venetec's current patent licensing policies. The basis for Venetec's contention that it is entitled to lost profits,

including the basis for Venetec's contention that it is entitled to lost profits on convoyed sales. 14. Your knowledge of acceptable, non-infringing alternatives to the claimed

inventions of the Patents-in-Suit. 15. The effect of selling products covered by the Patents-in-Suit in promoting

sales of non-patented items. 16. The established profitability of Venetec products embodying any claim of

the Patents-in-Suit, the popularity of any such products, and a detailed identification of the reasons for such profitability and/or popularity. 17. The portion of the realizable profit of Venetec products embodying any

claim of the Patents-in-Suit that should be credited to the claimed inventions of the Patents-inSuit as distinguished from non-patented features, improvements, or other value added by Venetec or others to such products. 18. Venetec's annual expenditures of research and development relating to

technology and inventions described in the Patents-in-Suit. 19. Patents-in-Suit. Every product that has been marked by Venetec or any licensee with the

4