Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01258-SLR Document 110 Filed 10/03/2005 Page 1 of 2
Momus, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL
1201 NORTH MARKET STREET
P.O. Box 1347
WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19899-1347
302 658 9200
JACK B. BLUMENEELD FAX
502 575 7251 September 30, 2005
302 425 3012 FAx
[email protected]
BY ELECTRONIC FILING
The Honorable Sue L. Robinson Original Filed September 30, 2005
United States District Court Redacted Public Version Filed October 3, 2005
844 King Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Re: McKesson Information Solutions, LLC v. The T riZetto Group, Inc.,
Civil Action No. 04-1258-SLR
Dear Chief Judge Robinson:
At the September 22 discovery conference, Trizetto raised the fact that certain witnesses
produced by McKesson as Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses did not have sufficient knowledge of the
topics for which they were produced. Trizetto also noted that certain witnesses identified by
McKesson in its Rule 26 disclosures did not have knowledge of the information listed in the
disclosures. As a result, the Court permitted the parties to make submissions concerning these
issues. Trizetto has identified four such McKesson witnesses.
Carolyn J. Wukitch
Ms. Wukitch was designated by McKesson as to topics 5, ll, 14-15 and 17-21 of
Trizetto's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice (Exhibit A). Those topics include:
• The enforcement of the 'l64 Patent, including all cease-and-desist letters, public
armouncements of intent to enforce the Patent, and litigation.
• All licenses to the 'l64 Patent that have been granted.
• Negotiations between HPR, HBOC and/or McKesson, on the one hand, and
Trizetto and/or RIMS, on the other hand.
As the highlighted version of Ms. Wukitch's deposition (Exhibit B) demonstrates, Ms. Wukitch
was unable to testify fully as to the matters designated.
J0hn N. Nunnelly
Mr. Nunnelly was designated by McKesson as to topics 7, 8 and 9 of Trizetto's Rule
30(b)(6) deposition notice (Exhibit A). Those topics include:

, » Case 1:04-cv-01258-SLR Document 110 Filed 10/03/2005 Page 2 of 2
Honorable Sue L. Robinson
September 30, 2005
Page 2
• HBOC's acquisition of I-IPR.
• HBOC's acquisition of GMIS.
• McKesson's acquisition of HBOC.
As the highlighted version of Mr. Nurmelly's deposition (Exhibit C) demonstrates, Mr. Ntmnelly
was unable to testify fully as to the matters designated.
Karen Bell
Ms. Bell was listed in McKesson's Rule 26 disclosures (Exhibit D, p. 4) as a McKesson
employee who is "likely to have information regarding McKesson's damages resulting from
Trizetto's willful infringement of the 'l64 patent." As the highlighted version of Ms. Bell's
deposition (Exhibit E) demonstrates, Ms. Bell did not have information regarding McKesson's
alleged damages.
Janet Cutcliff
Ms. Cutcliff was listed in McKesson's Rule 26 disclosures (Exhibit D, p. 4) as a
McKesson employee who is "likely to have information regarding Trizetto's willful inhtingement `
of the '164 patent and the resulting damages to McKesson." As the highlighted version of Ms. V
Cutcliffs deposition (Exhibit F) demonstrates, Ms. Cutcliff did not have information regarding
Trizetto's alleged infringement of the 'l64 Patent or the resulting damages to McKesson.
ir ie ·k
Based on the foregoing, Trizetto requests that the Court order McKesson to produce for
deposition representatives who can adequately testify to the topics listed in Trizetto's Rule
30(b)(6) deposition notice. Trizetto also requests that the Court permit TriZetto to take two
additional depositions because it would not have wasted two of its depositions on Ms. Bell and
Ms. Cutcliff had we known that they did not have the knowledge that McKesson’s Rule 26
disclosure said they did.
Respectfully,
/s/ Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
Jack B. Blumenfeld
JBB/bls
cc: Peter T. Dalleo, Clerk (By Hand)
Thomas J. Allingham, Esquire (By Hand)
Jeffrey G. Randall, Esquire (By Email)
Jeffrey T. Thomas, Esquire (By Email)
485447