Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT 6
Case 2:04-cv-OO400—PGFl Document 98-8 Filed O1/23/2006 Page1 of 4

Fax Server 8 1/20/2006 6 : 36 PAGE 001/003 Fax Server
,.1 1-1UNTON&\1J1I..LLAMsLLP
.mmET,N.w.
g:j,,;_ WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-1109
TEL 202-955 · 1500
FAX 202-778 ·2201~ ,
FAX
T0 NAME Sid Leach, Esq.
FIRM Snell & Wilmer V
FAXM0-* (602) 382-6070
PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): O3
FROM NAME¤ Emerson V. Briggs, Esq.
DIRECT D'AI—¤ (202) 955-‘| 500
DIRECT FAX:
MESSAGE USITC Investigation No. 337-TA-524
IF PROBLEM WITH TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER AT THE NUMBER LISTED ABOVE
FAXID¤ 02843D'| 2DA959BE
DATE: Friday, January 20, 2006
MME¤ 6:36:22 PIVI
CLIENT/MATTER NO.: 63839_()()O()()6
Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR Document 98-8 Filed O1/23/2006 Page 2 of 4

Fax Server 8 1/20/2006 6:36 PAGE 002/003 Fax Server

Huwrow a ivirtnns ii .i>
woo ir srusrrr. nw. .
wisimvoron. oc. 2()(i(16·'ll09
nai. an-;·<>ss · ism
mx an · ns · mi p
· Eivisasow v. muses. lll
onuzcr oianoozi oss. i an
EMAIL: ebriggs @liuntnn.eorn
January 20, 2006 t=1teNo;6;ss39.00000s . _
VIA FACSIMILE AND
FIRST CLASS MAIL
Sid Leach, Esq.
Snell & Wilmer, L.L.P.
One Arizona Center
400 E. Van Buren
Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202
Re: In the Matter of Certain Point of Sale Terminals and Component Parts '1`hereof
United States International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337 -TA-524
Dear Mr. Leach:
It has been brought to our attention that you and your limi have placed on the public record in
the case of Hypercom Corp. v. Omron Corp., 2:04-cv—400 (D. Ariz.)("the Omron Action") .
certain pleadings, orders and discovery documents that you and your firm obtained as part of
your representation of Hypercom in The Matter ry' Certain Point 0fSale Terminals and
Component Parts Thereof Investigation No. 337-TA-524, which is currently pending before .
the United States International Trade Commission ("the Commission"). Several of those
pleadings, orders and discovery documents are clearly and conspicuously marked as being
confidential under the Administrative Protective Order ("APO") entered in that Investigation-
Those confidential docu ments contain Verve's most sensitive business and operational
information, including Verve's tax returns.
By _placing those documents on the public record in the Omron Action, you and your firm are
in willful and knowing violation ofthe APO, which prohibits publication of confidential
materials, and the disclosure of those materials to entities · including Omron — who are not
parties to that Investigation. Documents that you have submitted in violation of the APO
include. without limitation, Exhibits 60, 65, 66, 67, 70, 71, 86, 9l and 92 to I-Iypercom
Corporation's Opposition to Ornron‘s Motion for Summary Judgment amd Hypercom's
Statement of Facts in Opposition to Omron's Motion for Summary Judgment. You also discuss
Vcrve‘s confidential information in the body of Hypercom’s Opposition and Statement of Facts
a·ri.a;—;·z·.¤. ar -.·. :r<;;.:t»:a arzi..·n:¢.= wir:-:i;r:i.s i. `2·e;i:·:1.<;t‘l?`t`i.E rmi. i—:;:·r<.>·zir—.»·ir.i..r.
s-retire: an aaa- rz.-=i,iann z-:;rr.ra·n<>;»:iw- ·~,;t.r.rtarrrni;>·:—t
_ 'f’»’t¤¤'¤. tiKl,1`¤S.;`$fll2'1 _
Case 2.04-cv—OO400—PGR Document 98-8 Filed O1/23/2006 Page 3 of 4

Fax Server 8 1/20/2006 6 : 38 PAGE 003/003 Fax Server ‘

Sid Leach, Esq.
January 20, 2006
Page 2 A
in further violation of the APO. In spite of this, you also failed to inform either Verve or the
Commission of these breaches of the APO as you were affirmatively required to do by the
terms of the APO itself. This failure continued, even after Omron brought to your attention
your obvious violation of the APO. Verve also continues to investigate the propriety of your
submission of confidential documents from thc Investigation elsewhere in the Omron Action,
and in the case of Verve, LLC v. Hypercom Corp., (D. Ariz.).
As a result of this, Verve has no choice but to request that the Commission szuiction you and
your firm for its willful violation of the APO. You have knowingly placed on the public record
_ Verve's most sensitive financial and operational information. As you know, Verve‘s business
includes the licensing and enforcement of United States Patents that it owns or controls. In the
ordinary course of that business, Verve regularly pursues licenses and assi gmnents of patent
rights from third-parties -- including Omron -» as pan of arms-length negotiations. Your
publication of Verve‘s most sensitive business information has and will continue to cause
incalculable damage to Verve and its ability to license and enforce its patent portfolio.
Consequently, you should know that Verve will request that the Commission sanction you and
your firm to the fullest extent permitted by 19 C.F.R. 2l0.33(b), and 2l0.34(c), including with
out limitation, the imposition of a substantial monetary penalty, an official public reprimand by
the Commission, the disqualification of you and your firm from further participation in the
pending Point of Sale Terminal Investigation, the pemianent disqualification of you and your
Erm from practicing in any capacity before the Commission, and the referral of this matter to
the licensing authority in any state in which you are admitted to practice law. _ -
` I trust that youunderstand the seriousness of this matter, and that you will contact me promptly -
so that we may discuss appropriate remedy for Verve for the substantial damage that you have -
done to it, and to otherwise attempt torectify this unfortunate situation. Thank you for your
attention. · .
Sincerely, _
»=
i .
/£A,>__r?»‘*··•·· 1/
merson V. Briggs, III
EVB/cl
cc: Verve, LLC I
· Case 2:04-cv-OO400—PGFl Document 98-8 Filed O1/23/2006 Page 4 of 4

EXHIBIT 6

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 98-8

Filed 01/23/2006

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 98-8

Filed 01/23/2006

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 98-8

Filed 01/23/2006

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 98-8

Filed 01/23/2006

Page 4 of 4