Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF Document 781 Filed O9/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2
FWCZHAFQDS, LAYTON St FINGER
A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
ONE: Ronwev SQUARE;
EEO Nosrrt-• Kim; Srnerzr
ANNE SHEA GAM W1t.mrr~1cs·r0N, Dr=;i.AwAi=a¤; reason D|;;C;ggA?,;;}g§R
COUNSEL (302) GSI-7'PCJO GAzA@aLF com
rmx <;=.oa> est-vvoi
WWW FRLFZCDM
August 28, 2007
REDACTED - PUBLIC VERSION
VIA E- FILE AND HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Vincent J Poppiti
BLANK, ROME LLP
Chase Manhattan Center
1.201 Market Street, Suite 800
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: LG.PhiIfgs LCD Ca.,1Lrd. v. Vicw.S'ar:fc cr nl., CA. No. 04~343—·JJF
Dear Special Master Poppiti:
At the hearing yesterday, Your Honor granted the Tatung Defendants’ motion to compel a Rule
30(b)(6) witness trom McKenna, Long & Aldridge ("MLA”) respecting alleged prior art disclosed in
LPL’s recent supplemental document production This letter is directed to the outstanding issue ofthe
extent to which the Tatung Defendants are entitled to question the MLA witness concerning the LG
500 LC monitor (the “5 00 LC"), which was discovered by the defendants before the recent document
production.
LPL’s argument is that the Tatung Defendants should be precluded from exploring any issues
regarding 500 LC because they knew about that product before the discoveryi The Tatung Defendants
were aware of the existence of the 500 LC and, indeed, as set forth below, questioned LPL’s Rule
30(b)(6) witness about that product., The 500 LC is invalidating only if LPL’s argurnent that a LCD
bracket or "tray" is the first frame is sustained. Thus, alone, the 500 LC reference, in Tatung’s view,
did not justiiy the deposition of MLA. However, the combination of the recently produced Luclcy
Goldstar reference gpg the omission ofthe 500 LC from the most recent MLA supplemental disclosure
statement filed with the PTO in connection with the `079 Application, now make the issues respecting
the 500 LC far more probative ofthe issue of inequitable conduct
Taken together, the newly disclosed Lucky Goldstar Module, which teaches rnounting elements
solely on the back of the tirst frame of the LCD device and the 500 LC monitor, which teaches screws
inserted through the back of the casing into the LCD bracket or "tray," corroborate the Tatung
Defendants’ inequitable conduct defense. The Tatung Defendants are entitled to discovery on this
defense by inquiring about the 500 LC, as well as the newly disclosed alleged prior art.
stri-slums-1

Case 1 :04-cv-00343-JJF Document 781 Filed O9/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
REDACTED
r , the Tatung Defendants are entitled to depose
the prosecuting attorneys to determine (1) what MLA did to locate prior art, (2) whether l\/ILA was
aware of the 500 LC product, and (3) why that product was not produced during the prosecution of the
patents in suit and the IDS Bled in connection with the ‘0'/9 Application
Finally, exploration of the 500 LC issues falls within the purview of the first noticed deposition
topic That topic seeks information from the Rule 30(b)(6) witness regarding MLA’s prosecution
policies and procedures Given that Lora Bryzenslci recently represented MLA’s practice is to list all
alleged prior art producer} during supplemental discovery, the Tatung Defendants should be allowed to
ask why McKenna varied this procedure by omitting the 500 LC trorn the recently tiled IDS.
For all these reasons, tire Tatung Defendants respectfully submit that they are entitled to
explore issues regarding the 500 LC monitor at the MLA Rule 30(b)(6) deposition.
Respectfully,
(/lmao? _ldfl¤*g’··’
Anne Siren Gaza (#4093)
ASG/afg
Enclosure
cc: Clerk of the Coun (By Electronic Filing)
All Counsel of Record (via electronic mail)
m.r=1»z1a4ws-l 2

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF

Document 781

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF

Document 781

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 2 of 2