Free Objections - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 71.5 kB
Pages: 3
Date: September 17, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 738 Words, 4,742 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/7695/785-16.pdf

Download Objections - District Court of Delaware ( 71.5 kB)


Preview Objections - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF Document 785-16 Filed O9/17/2007 Page1 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF Document 785-16 Filed O9/17/2007 Page 2 of 3
l Traurig 9
Valerie W Ho
ret sie ssa nm
Fax siosss race
t»to\!@gttaw com
August 13, Z00?
Vin E-Mail and U.S.
Cass Christensen, Esq.
McKenna Long & Aldridge l.,l..P
1900 K Stieet., N. W,
Washington, DC. 20006 i _w_N__
[ .·.Msirrr.·..
Re: LG Philips LCD Co., Lid vs. ViewSonic Cot·pornt.·'on·, at nl g mm_q’ H
Delaware District Court, Case No. 04·~34.3 UF § Hm wm
Dear Cass: recon
{ ukt:=.st‘ts‘
As Ms Brzeynski is on vacation, we are directing this letter to your attention. In light of LPL’s iM°"i:°°
recent document productions, inciuding disclosure ofthe LG LC056`t\1i module, it has become
H€C€SS&t‘y for US to dcposc the attorney at MoK,g;mri_ [Img & Aldyjdgc who is {Mmmm with the i tr-···~*~··M
tinn’s policies and procedures regarding patent prosecution and who piaycd a substantial role , ""`*“"°
in lZl1'O$€CUil1“1g UIG P8I@I1lS—ll'l-Suit. Until today’s lteztring, wc believed {hg gppygpi-iam yvhncss will-et viwnr
was Rebecca Rudich, whose declaration stated that she is involved in prosecution activities """"“’**"
relating to the Patents—in—Suit and that she is the senior partner in charge ofall prosecution in ~.-- isn
workt At 10dé1y’S iltwliilg, h0W€V€t, MS. BtZGyUSl=ii suggested tor thc iirst time that while Ms,. >O'**'°**'·*"
Rudiclt has worked in this capacity for the past several years, she worked in a different capacity * =¤$··~<¤·r<
as an associate during the time the Patents-in—Suit were being prosecutedl Ms- Brzeynski M··==<·
further represented that Ms, Rudich is not competent to testitjz regarding prosecution of the g ·—~¤.·==r
Patcnts—in~Suit or the tirm policies regarding patent prosecution For the time frame in question, ar~·nnrr··
ritwvoar
ln light of Msr Brzcynskfs statements today, we propose the ioliowing corrtpromise: l artnet i;.a.t·.i;-.-
l 1‘»¤!1=-mat}
1) LPL will not be required to submit documents from its privilege log for in camera review; ; r.i.r.·.a.r..i
at-ull! I-: 1
2) McKenna will make Ms. Rudich available tor a short deposition limited to questions W.,
relating to tltc “079 patent application; ,,,i,_,,i,_,,,,_r_
_ it,.t.rJrttil.,r¤ _
3) ln lieu ofrnalcing Ms, Rudicb available on other topics, McKenna wili provide an li ,__,_,M_,_N,. t
appropriate Ruie 30(b){6) witness for deposition. The topics will include McKenna’s policies § m_,,___ I
and procedures relating to patent prosecution, any policies and procedures implemented by § mm r
McKenna to ensure that its prosecuting attorneys and clients comply with their duty of Candor ,J__,_H, _ __P V Q
to the Patent Oftice, the custom and practice employed by McKenna prosecution attorneys in M Hi} _!
, , , . , . , , , , , _ · w··.5*i ect a'-i 6;:
connection with obtaining, investigating, evaluating and disclosing prior art, the prosecution of . __ p g l
the F'atents—in—Suit, and whether any Mclicnna attorney was involved in any capacity in the LG. ’ if `4`i i_ '``` W M i
in 126905449vE 8/isaac? .‘". L`Q-.;T `.,. .. _
uinwitticig imung Lili intrrtrrutgs it t.-·1.—.· {tos :‘tngtttt=; [3*%::- |E»1€{” tT¤;lnr-rain;¤.t·rectn— lT$t:nr= ~1t`ICE lfiantci t~it.=nl;.a in €+·3·tt.¤rt , - ~ - ~ - ~-
Tet iiitiliélé i’?0t`.l iis-. iiiliitib ?‘EiF.l r·.tt·.·i·. igr!;a.·.· com i

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF Document 785-16 Filed O9/17/2007 Page 3 of 3
Cass Wt Christensen, Esq.
August 13, 2007
Page 2
Philips LCD Co , Ltd v. NECCj'0tytv01·ort'0tz litigation We, ofcourse, are amenable to
discussing the topics in more detail with your
Please iet us know ifthis proposal is acceptabie to LPL. and Mclicnna by the close of business
on August i4, 2007, if the parties cannot reach agreement, we intend to bring this proposal to
the Speciai Mastefs attention at the August 36, 2007 hearing.
Very ttuiy Yours,
fu"- "_ __ _, .---···——--·:-....~_ _,
Valerie W. Ho
cc: Counsel on service list (via email)
tn T269U544Qv2 a/wana?
Greenberg Trsurig, §.LP I

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF

Document 785-16

Filed 09/17/2007

Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT 15

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF

Document 785-16

Filed 09/17/2007

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF

Document 785-16

Filed 09/17/2007

Page 3 of 3