Free Exhibits - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:03-cv-02579-RPM

Document 146-2

Filed 01/11/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN FOR

THE

STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORhDO

VARCO

L.P
Plaintiff

vs
PASON SYSTEMS USA CORPORATION

03-cv-02579-RPM

10

CONFERENCE TRANSCRIPT

AFTER PROCEEDINGS

11

Proceedings
12

held Judge

HONORABLE

RICHARD

MATSCH
13

Colorado
21st

beginning
14

at

155 p.m

on

the

day of

2006 Denver

in

Conference
15
16

Room United

States

Courthouse

Colorado

APPEARANCES For the Plaintiff Guy Edward Robert McGee Bowick Matthews Firm 1900 West Loop

17
18

Esq

Jr

Esq

1800

19 20 21
22

Houston

77057

Jane Michaels Esq Holland Hart LLP-Denver 555 Seventeenth Street 3200 Colorado 80202 Denver

23
24

Proceedings recorded transcript

by electronic

sound

recording

25

Case 1:03-cv-02579-RPM

Document 146-2

Filed 01/11/2007

Page 2 of 4

APPEARANCES
For the

Cant
Barbara Mark Weil

Esq
Pryor

Haynes Ireland Stapleton Pascoe
1675

Denver

Broadway1 Colorado

80202

Timothy

Atkinson
Ulster

Esq
Burrus
LL1P

Bieging
4582

South

Street
80237

Parkway 1650 Colorado Denver

10

11

13

16 17
18

19 20 21 22

24

Case 1:03-cv-02579-RPM

Document 146-2

Filed 01/11/2007

Page 3 of 4

took found

out

of

the

sails

of

much

of

this

Court had

persuasive
THE

COURT
this

Yeah

And

you

know
the

they

did say on interpretation
the

remand
of

Court

should they

consider

proper

Claim

14
see

say do wiggle
are

But on
is

other

hand

where We

room

anymore
certainly

MR
would anticipate
see

looking

for that
we

presenting Your

it
we

And
would

if we not the

dont
10 11
12 13

it quite
time in

waste

the

Courts
to

terms--and move directly
or not the patents

issue as invalid

whether
on

are infringed

upon

or

based

that

construction the claims
are

Yeah case
and

now

in

the

14

11
And dont
how many of them

15 16
17 18 19

MR MATTHEWS

And
are dependent

didnt go back-Well
11

and

14

are all

independent COURT

20 21 22
23

Okay
the

Court will

recall

14

measured

the

change

of

bit

COURT

R9ht
And
of of

24 25

pressure pressure

11

is

just

like

14

but

measures

only

Case 1:03-cv-02579-RPM

Document 146-2

Filed 01/11/2007

Page 4 of 4

THE

You

dont mean testimony
Prosecution

MR MR ATKINSON MR
there was
an

Prosecution
Your Honor

its
based
on-

because

parte
to

-and

they

filed and

their

brief
filed and THE
10

We

responded

it And
for 18

copies

they record

reply to our

thats now

all

public

months

Well you know
to trial

my preference claim
at

in

this

matter there

is

to

and

deal

with

11
12

be

any claim construction think

trial
when
we

have went

found
the in

it--

Ive

mentioned

before

13 14

preliminary injunction separate because claim construction you

believe

these

hearings
significance and

Its
the

mistake
until

15 16
17

dont know
about

talking are issues necessary
in at for

infringement can

validity

And

those that

trial and
issues

hear

same evidence
the

18
19

claim construction

same

time

and

rule

on

it

the

20 21 22
23

ThatsMR
THE

Lets go
COURT ATKINSON

Thats the
we would

embodiment
certainly agree with

24 25

Your

MR

--this comes

from

judge

guarantee