Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-00360-JJF Document 108-7 Filed 03/ 1 7/2006 Page 1 of 2
1
h ROTHWELL. FIGG. ERNST & MANBECK,1>.c.
1425 K Street, N.W G. Franklin Rothwell Anne M. fmerba
Suite 800 E. Anthony Figg Lisa N. P i ips l
v¤s~¤g¤¤¤. 0-0- 20005 E.22‘i$‘§‘§s.E.’t“§£t, 1. é?‘§1.i..i"l%?}}.i‘i§ i
George R. Repper Patrick TZ Skacel
, , S eve L` ber a Monica C. Kitts l
i§iZi.[Q$Z€2$ii7Zi?6$2iO giggggg ,I$,§§2‘$¤·* ,
WWW·rfcm·COm Richard Wydivetl; Steven M. Ggvannetti `
Marrin M. Zo ic H unkweon
.l8I`1l.l3I`y 26, Mimksi Bharrx R?Elizabcth Bfiijnncr
Sharon L. Davis Adam M. Treiber
Robert B. Murray Daniel L. Shores
Carla C. Calcagno ]oseph E. Green i
]ef`frey L. Ihnen
Seng ECK¤rg=¤ Ph D OfCounsel hu l
' nravssi. ·· onA.cCai
Davld W· Harlem Esq _ Brin; S. R¤¤¢¤i>l¤¤m litiihara SX/1/ebbWalker, mo. Q
Senniger, Powers, L€&V1tt& lioedel _Nm Admmdm Dc-
One Metropolitan Square, 16 Floor
St. Louis, MO 63102
Re: Trilegiant Loyalty Solutions v. Maritz
Our Reference 2829-179
Dear David:
In my January 6, 2006 letter to you, I requested that Maritz remedy the numerous
deficiencies in Maritz’s privilege log. Maritz’s revised privilege log does not address the
following deficiencies that I identified in that letter.
Over one-half of the documents listed on the log were given the stock and uninformative
description that they involve a communication between counsel and client "conveying legal
advice regarding patent protection" or "conveying legal advice regarding obtaining patent
protection." Maritz’s revised log still does not provide descriptions sufficient for Trilegiant to
assess whether Maritz’s claim of privilege is warranted. All we have asked is for Maritz to
identify the patent or patent application discussed in the document so that Trilegiant is able to
confirm that Maritz’s claims of privilege is proper.
Similarly, with regard to the many documents that were described as involving a
communication between counsel and client regarding a "contractual ag;reement," Maritz’s revised
log still does not provide descriptions sufficient for Trilegiant to assess whether Maritz’s claim of
privilege is warranted. All we have asked is for Maritz to identify the parties to the contract and
the type of contract so that Trilegiant can confirm that Maritz’s claim of attorney-client privilege
is proper and that the contract does not relate to Trilegiant or Netcentives.
We asked that the same basic information be provided with regard to the documents
described as involving a communication between counsel and client regarding a "business
opportunity," "potential business opportunity," "litigation," "program," or "employee
investment." Trilegiant merely seeks information regarding the parties to the business
opportunity, litigation, program, or investment, in order to confirm that the subject matter of the
document does not relate to Trilegiant or Netcentives. Maritz’s revised log does not clarify the
matter at all.
Ex. 6

Case 1:04-cv-00360-JJF Document 108-7 Filed 03/17/2006 Page 2 of 2
ROTHWELI., FIGG, ERNST Sw. MANBECK. RC.
David W. Harlan, Esq.
January 26, 2006
Page 2 L
The specific documents to which the foregoing objections pertain are identified in my i
January 16, 2006 letter. The same information must also be provided for the new documents J
listed on the privilege log. We do not see how Maritz can possibly find these objections to be
unreasonable or unduly burdensome, and do not understand the basis for Maritz not providing the J
information sought.
Moreover, Maritz still has not produced a privilege log for the documents previously i
produced in redacted form.
If Maritz does not produce a revised privilege log that addresses the foregoing objections l
by January 30, 2006, Trilegiant will have no recourse but to address this matter before the Court. j
Very truly yours,
R. Elizabeth Bremer
REB:erh y
cc: J. Bennett Clark, Esq.
Scott Eidson, Esq. .
J
Enclosure l
L:\2829\2829-179.Ll'I\LE'l'I`ERS\l~lARLAN.L9.DOC l
J
J
j l
I
J
J
J
J

l
J


Case 1:04-cv-00360-JJF

Document 108-7

Filed 03/17/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-00360-JJF

Document 108-7

Filed 03/17/2006

Page 2 of 2