Free Declaration - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 86.9 kB
Pages: 3
Date: June 29, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 488 Words, 3,153 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/8723/502-6.pdf

Download Declaration - District Court of Delaware ( 86.9 kB)


Preview Declaration - District Court of Delaware
Case1:04—cv-01371-JJF Document 502-6 Filed 06/29/2007 Page10f3
E h ` b `t E

Case 1 :04-cv-01371-JJF Document 502-6 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 2 of 3
FISH 8L RICHARDSON P. C.
500 Arguello Street
Suite goo
Redwood City, California
94063—I§26
Frederick P. Fish
‘8""”’° VIA FACSIMILE & U.s. MAIL Q;’.l°§°§Y§‘§,O
WK. Richardson
1859*99 Facsimile
January 26, 2007 "° 8”"°"
Web Site
Gabriel M. Ramsey “’“’“'·LL·°°L“
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Michael R Headley
Marsh Road (650) 839-$139
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Email
Re: Power Integrations Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l h°dl€y@fr'°°m
USDC-D. Del. - C.A. No. 04-1371-JJF
® Dear Gabe:
Mmm Yesterday, Fairchild’s forensic expert Erich Speckin reviewed all of the documents
“°"°N Klas Eklund produced in this case, including the hundreds of pages in Dr. Ek1und’s
DALLAS old binders and the early documents originally marked as trial exhibit PX—37 (later re-
DELAWARE marked at Fairchild’s request as separate exhibits PX-29 and PX-30). We previously
NEW YORK agreed to permit Mr. Speckin a full range of forensic inspection of these documents,
SAN DIEGO including micropunch sampling/testing, microscopic inspection, photographing, and
the like, but Mr. Speckin chose not to do anything more than inspect the documents
SILICON VALLEY with the naked eye. Given that both parties brought forensic experts out to California
TWIN mms for the inspection and that Mr. Speckin had unfettered access to the documents, we
“”*‘$“’“°T°"‘· DC expect that Mr. Speckin’s work is finished. To that end, if you intend to provide any
testimony from Mr. Speckin, please provide us with his report no later than Friday,
February 16. If we do not receive any written report from Mr. Speckin by that point,
we will presume Fairchild does not intend to introduce any testimony on this issue. If
Fairchild later seeks to introduce any such testimony, we will move to preclude it, as
the delay will have prejudiced our ability to prepare for trial.
Sincerely,
/
7%%/%7
Michael R. Headley
50396311.doc /

01/26/2007 15* 46 FAX 6508395071 FISH & RICHARDSON 001
—
» xmexeemxmxxeeeeeeeeem
wir TX REPORT >i<>i=>1=
eeemmeeeeexeemeeeeeee
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX N0 1718
CONNECTION TEL 256#I>000453531#P6147401#
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME 01/26 15:46
USAGE T 00' 43
Pcs. SENT / ¢/ Q % .
RESULT /4 I \
FISH SC RICHARDSON P.C. ·
500 A.rgu::l.l0 Street
l
1;;-lclcjvzzj. City, California
9406;-1516
Telephone
6s¤ $39-s¤v¤
Date ]ZI1u2iIy 26, 2007 pmgmgle
650 8395071
To Gabriel M. Ramsey Web site
Orrick, Harrington & Sutcliffe LLP — Menlo Park ,,,,,,.,_y;_c0m
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA
Telephone: (650) 614-7400
Facsimile number 10256-0045353] /(650) 614-7401
From Michael R. Headley
Re Power Inte ggatious, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Intcmational
USDC-D. Del. — CA. N0. 04-1371 JJF
Number of pages
including this page 2
Message