Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 188

Declaration of Christine P. Sun in Support of 183 Motion to Compel Production of Documents and Testimony Re Prosecution of '361 Patent [Supplemental Declaration] filed by Google Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Exhibit C# 4 Exhibit D# 5 Exhibit E)(Related document(s) 183 ) (Sun, Christine) (Filed on 7/7/2004)

Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Doc. 188 Att. 4

Case 3:02-cv-01991-JSW

Document 188-5

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT D

Dockets.Justia.com

NOV-10-2003 3:02-cv-01991-JSW I CAGO BHGL CH Document 188-5 Case 17:

31 Filed 07/07/2004 2 321 4299 of 3 02/03 Page 2

BRINKS
Charles M. McMahon
31N214782
~DI~mn ho n(ijJ brinks

h ore r. cmn

HOFER GilSON
&lIONE
A l'Rofe$SIIJNAL (ORI'ORAn~
IHTRLECTUAl.PRop~m ATro~NEY~

N9C Towa! . SUITE 3600

November 10, 2003

455 N. OT'lFRONT PlAZA DI!1VE
, CHICAGIJ luJrIOIS 60611-5599 www_ brinksh"fer. com
FAX [phone]

Tim'IIQN~

312.321'4200

SAN JOSE, CA

INOtA/W'OUS, IN

ANIt AIIBoII. MI
ARuMGTON, VA

via facsimile and first class mail

Christine P. SlUl,

Esq.

KEKER & VAN NEST, LL.P. 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111- 1704
Re:

Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc. Civ. No. CO2-01991 (N. D. Cal.)

Dear Christine:

We received your letter of November 7 , 2003, regarding Google s request for production of Overture s privileged documents. As I previously explained , I expect that Jason White and/or Jack Berenzweig will be involved in any telephone call to meet-andconfer regarding these issues. Neither Jack nor Jason are available for a telephone call Monday through Thursday of this week. We propose a telephone conference at 11:00 a.m. CT (9:00 a.m. PT) on Friday, November 14, 2003. Please confirm that you will be available at this time.
In the meantime, your letter merits a substantive response on two points. First , with respect to Google s contention regarding waiver, we disagree that the cited deposition or the workeither the attorney-client privilege testimony creates a subject matter waiver of product doctrine with respect to any of the docwnents listed on Overture s privilege log.
Second , with respect to Google s contention regarding the crime- fraud exception, Google still has not specifically identified a single allegedly false statement. The general reference to alleged misrepresentations in your letter of October 17 , 2003 , does not provide case of fraud. aprimajac:ie the evidence of a speciflc false statement necessary to establish regarding an intent to deceive. any evidence whatsoever Moreover , Google has not cited

NOV-10-20033:02-cv-01991-JSW I CAGO BHGL CH Document 188-5 Case 17:08

31 Filed 07/07/2004 2 321 4299 of 3 03/03 Page 3

Christine P. Sun, Esq.
November 10 , 2003
Page 2

Prior to our telephone conference on Friday~ we request that you identify the

specific evidence of an alleged intent to deceive , upon specific allegedly false statements and the which Google bases its contention regarding the crime- fraud exception.

Best regards

Charles M. McMahon

TnTAI P - VI~