Timebase Pty Ltd v. Thomson Corporation, The

Filing 247

Declaration of Jenna J. Bayer in Support of 246 Memorandum in Support of Motion filed by Timebase Pty Ltd. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A - Part 1, # 2 Exhibit(s) A - Part 2, # 3 Exhibit(s) B, # 4 Exhibit(s) C, # 5 Exhibit(s) D - Part 1, # 6 Exhibit(s) D - Part 2, # 7 Placeholder for Exhibit E, # 8 Exhibit(s) F, # 9 Exhibit(s) G, # 10 Exhibit(s) H, # 11 Exhibit(s) I, # 12 Exhibit(s) J, # 13 Exhibit(s) K, # 14 Exhibit(s) L, # 15 Appendix A, # 16 Appendix B, # 17 Appendix C, # 18 Appendix D - Part 1, # 19 Appendix D - Part 2, # 20 Appendix D - Part 3, # 21 Appendix E - Part 1, # 22 Appendix E - Part 2, # 23 Appendix F - Part 1, # 24 Appendix F - Part 2, # 25 Appendix F - Part 3, # 26 Appendix F - Part 4, # 27 Appendix F - Part 5, # 28 Appendix F - Part 6, # 29 Appendix F - Part 7, # 30 Appendix F - Part 8, # 31 Appendix F - Part 9, # 32 Appendix F - Part 10, # 33 Appendix F - Part 11, # 34 Appendix F - Part 12, # 35 Appendix F - Part 13, # 36 Appendix F - Part 14, # 37 Appendix F - Part 15, # 38 Appendix F - Part 16, # 39 Appendix G - Part 1, # 40 Appendix G - Part 2)(Hosteny, Joseph)

Exhibit F

(Rule 30(b)(6) Notices of Deposition to Defendants)

to

TimeBase’s Memorandum in Support of Its Motion
for Summary Judgment of No Invalidity

TIMEBASE PTY LTD.,
vs.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Plaintiff,

THE THOMSON CORPORATION, WEST
PUBLISHING CORPORATION, AND WEST
SERVICES, INC.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

File No. 07-CV-1687 (JNE/JJG)

TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
OF THE THOMSON CORPORATION
PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6)

TimeBase will depose defendant The Thomson Corporation (“Thomson”) pursuant

to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) at the offices of Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A., 500 IDS
Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, beginning at 9:30 a.m. on

July 12, 2010 (or at any other mutually convenient time and location) and continuing from
day-to-day until completed. The deposition will be taken by stenographic means and may
be videotaped as well.

As provided by Rule 30(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., Thomson must designate one or more

officers, directors, managing agents or other persons who consent to testify upon its behalf
and who have knowledge of, and are adequately prepared to testify about the topics set
forth below.

“Accused” includes the products and services identified in TimeBase’s Second
DEFINITIONS

Amended Complaint and in TimeBase’s Supplemental Infringement Claim Chart with
exhibits.

When TimeBase says “for example” or “including” in a topic, it is illustrating the

topic, not limiting or restricting it.

Communications and meetings with TimeBase or its representatives or
TOPICS

agents including, for example, BMG and Jon Klemens.
1.

Information possessed or obtained about TimeBase from any source,

including third parties.
2.

Knowledge of TimeBase’s intellectual property including the patents

asserted in this litigation.
3.

Any analysis of TimeBase’s intellectual property, including any advice,

opinions, studies or communications regarding the infringement, validity, or enforceability
4.

of the patents asserted in this litigation.

Facts relevant to willful infringement, and any actions taken in response to

steps taken to avoid infringement.
5.

Any attempts to design around the patents in suit, including any

consideration of alternative(s) to any accused products or services.
6.

The basis for filing any request to reexamine the patents in

suit, and the selection of document(s) submitted with such requests.
7.

8.

invalidity.
9.

The design and operation of each accused product or service.

The facts supporting the defendants’ contentions of non-infringement and
The physical location of and configuration of databases used with any

accused product or service, and the division and storage approach to data held in them.
10.

11.

The differences between versioned and non-versioned databases.
2

The buy-versus-develop analysis during the design and development of each

accused product or service.
12.

A description and explanation of Magellan, OSR, OSR II, Bermuda, Novus,

Ampex, Xanadu, Xena, Statmark, ELVIS, DEPTH, Stable table, CP record, RC record, KCITEi
13.

record and FINDORIG record, and seven field mark-up or query.

The earliest date when each accused product or service was available to a

customer or user.
14.

The patenting activities relevant to any accused product or service, including

7,085,755, and any applications including Mr. Spencer or Ms. Agard as an inventor.
15.

16.

The accused products and services that are accessible through WestlawNext.
Licenses, contracts or other agreements entered into or acquired that are

relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service, including the
17.

identification of the relevant documents and parties involved, and including the Shasta
license and any other licenses.
18.

Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Acquisitions, investments in, licenses with, or purchases of assets or

companies relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service,
19.

for example, NetScan, including the identification of the asset or company, and the cost.

The revenues and profits related to or produced by the accused products or

services, including from customers or users outside the United States.
20.

Any analysis of the percentage of customer use or revenue or

anticipated use or revenue related to any accused product or service broken down on a
21.

feature by feature basis.

3

Forecasts, projections, estimates, strategic plans or the like relevant to the

accused products or services, including anticipated costs, profits and benefits of any kind.
22.

Any analysis, including but not limited to any surveys, of

customer demand or customer use related to any accused product or service.
23.

Contracts with customers or users, for example, El Paso, Fresno County or

Tarrant County, including customers or users outside the United States.
24.

Communications with customers or users, or potential customers or users,

including customers or users outside the United States.
25.

The identities of customers for or users of the accused products or services,

including customers or users outside the United States.
26.

Marketing and advertising activities and communications relevant to the

accused products and services.
27.

The pricing strategy, pricing plans, subscriptions, bundles, and discounts for

the accused products and services.
28.

29.

An explanation of master brands, features, product brands and sunsets.
Activities designed to distinguish any accused product or service from

services offered by competitors, such as Lexis.
30.

Facts bearing on the timing and content of a hypothetical negotiation to

determine a reasonable royalty, for example, as discussed in TimeBase’s response to the
31.

defendants’ Interrogatory 4.

Facts relevant to the amount of damages should the defendant be found

liable for infringement.
32.

4

Knowledge of the references cited in Thomson’s original and supplemental

prior art statements, including when the defendant learned of any of the references.
33.

34.

The level of ordinary skill in the art for the patents asserted in this litigation.

The factual basis for the answer and affirmative defenses, including the steps

or structure in any accused product or service that is a basis for non-infringement.
35.

36.

Contacts with SAIC or Timothy Arnold-Moore.

The documents produced by Thomson, including the search for and

collection of documents in response to TimeBase’s requests.
37.

Thomson’s responses to TimeBase’s interrogatories, including all aspects of

subscription, revenue and usage based figures provided including formulas collection
38.

methodology and accuracy.

The organization and types of documents maintained by the defendant,

either electronically or in paper form, that specify the design, construction and use of the
39.

accused products and services, and the databases used with them, including DTDs,
schemas, software specifications and the like.

Communications with, benefits offered or provided to, or payments offered

or made to witnesses, deponents, any potential witness or potential deponent, including
40.

Mr. Schnelle, Ms. Lessing, or Mr. Arnold-Moore.

/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny
Joseph N. Hosteny
Arthur A. Gasey
Niro, Haller & Niro
181 West Madison Street, Suite 4600
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
5

Michael R. Cunningham
Attorney No. 20424
GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY,
MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A.
500 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

6

The undersigned hereby certifies that TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

THE THOMSON CORPORATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6) was served on May 20,
2010 upon Thomson's counsel, listed below, by email and first-class mail to:
Mindy Sooter; [e-mail]
Terry Beyl; [e-mail]
Katherine S. Razavi; [e-mail]
Kevin P. Wagner; [e-mail]
David Gross; [e-mail]
Calvin L. Litsey; [e-mail]
Theodore M. Budd; [e-mail]
Faegre & Benson LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center
90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Phone: 612‐766‐7000
Fax: 612‐766‐1600
Attorneys for Thomson Corporation

/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny

TIMEBASE PTY LTD.,
vs.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Plaintiff,

THE THOMSON CORPORATION, WEST
PUBLISHING CORPORATION, AND WEST
SERVICES, INC.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

File No. 07-CV-1687 (JNE/JJG)

TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
OF WEST PUBLISHING CORPORATION
PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6)

TimeBase will depose defendant West Publishing Corporation (“West Publishing”)

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) at the offices of Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A.,
500 IDS Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, beginning at 9:30
a.m. on July 14, 2010 (or at any other mutually convenient time and location) and

continuing from day-to-day until completed. The deposition will be taken by stenographic
means and may be videotaped as well.

As provided by Rule 30(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., West Publishing must designate one or

more officers, directors, managing agents or other persons who consent to testify upon its

behalf and who have knowledge of, and are adequately prepared to testify about the topics
set forth below.

“Accused” includes the products and services identified in TimeBase’s Second
DEFINITIONS

Amended Complaint and in TimeBase’s Supplemental Infringement Claim Chart with
exhibits.

When TimeBase says “for example” or “including” in a topic, it is illustrating the

topic, not limiting or restricting it.

Communications and meetings with TimeBase or its representatives or
TOPICS

agents including, for example, BMG and Jon Klemens.
1.

Information possessed or obtained about TimeBase from any source,

including third parties.
2.

Knowledge of TimeBase’s intellectual property including the patents

asserted in this litigation.
3.

Any analysis of TimeBase’s intellectual property, including any advice,

opinions, studies or communications regarding the infringement, validity, or enforceability
4.

of the patents asserted in this litigation.

Facts relevant to willful infringement, and any actions taken in response to

steps taken to avoid infringement.
5.

Any attempts to design around the patents in suit, including any

consideration of alternative(s) to any accused products or services.
6.

The basis for filing any request to reexamine the patents in

suit, and the selection of document(s) submitted with such requests.
7.

8.

invalidity.
9.

The design and operation of each accused product or service.

The facts supporting the defendants’ contentions of non-infringement and
The physical location of and configuration of databases used with any

accused product or service, and the division and storage approach to data held in them.
10.

11.

The differences between versioned and non-versioned databases.
2

The buy-versus-develop analysis during the design and development of each

accused product or service.
12.

A description and explanation of Magellan, OSR, OSR II, Bermuda, Novus,

Ampex, Xanadu, Xena, Statmark, ELVIS, DEPTH, Stable table, CP record, RC record, KCITEi
13.

record and FINDORIG record, and seven field mark-up or query.

The earliest date when each accused product or service was available to a

customer or user.
14.

The patenting activities relevant to any accused product or service, including

7,085,755, and any applications including Mr. Spencer or Ms. Agard as an inventor.
15.

16.

The accused products and services that are accessible through WestlawNext.
Licenses, contracts or other agreements entered into or acquired that are

relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service, including the
17.

identification of the relevant documents and parties involved, and including the Shasta
license and any other licenses.
18.

Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Acquisitions, investments in, licenses with, or purchases of assets or

companies relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service,
19.

for example, NetScan, including the identification of the asset or company, and the cost.

The revenues and profits related to or produced by the accused products or

services, including from customers or users outside the United States.
20.

Any analysis of the percentage of customer use or revenue or

anticipated use or revenue related to any accused product or service broken down on a
21.

feature by feature basis.

3

Forecasts, projections, estimates, strategic plans or the like relevant to the

accused products or services, including anticipated costs, profits and benefits of any kind.
22.

Any analysis, including but not limited to any surveys, of

customer demand or customer use related to any accused product or service.
23.

Contracts with customers or users, for example, El Paso, Fresno County or

Tarrant County, including customers or users outside the United States.
24.

Communications with customers or users, or potential customers or users,

including customers or users outside the United States.
25.

The identities of customers for or users of the accused products or services,

including customers or users outside the United States.
26.

Marketing and advertising activities and communications relevant to the

accused products and services.
27.

The pricing strategy, pricing plans, subscriptions, bundles, and discounts for

the accused products and services.
28.

29.

An explanation of master brands, features, product brands and sunsets.
Activities designed to distinguish any accused product or service from

services offered by competitors, such as Lexis.
30.

Facts bearing on the timing and content of a hypothetical negotiation to

determine a reasonable royalty, for example, as discussed in TimeBase’s response to the
31.

defendants’ Interrogatory 4.

Facts relevant to the amount of damages should the defendant be found

liable for infringement.
32.

4

Knowledge of the references cited in West Publishing’s original and

supplemental prior art statements, including when the defendant learned of any of the
33.

references.
34.

The level of ordinary skill in the art for the patents asserted in this litigation.

The factual basis for the answer and affirmative defenses, including the steps

or structure in any accused product or service that is a basis for non-infringement.
35.

36.

Contacts with SAIC or Timothy Arnold-Moore.

The documents produced by West Publishing, including the search for and

collection of documents in response to TimeBase’s requests.
37.

West Publishing’s responses to TimeBase’s interrogatories, including all

aspects of subscription, revenue and usage based figures provided including formulas
38.

collection methodology and accuracy.

The organization and types of documents maintained by the defendant,

either electronically or in paper form, that specify the design, construction and use of the
39.

accused products and services, and the databases used with them, including DTDs,
schemas, software specifications and the like.

Communications with, benefits offered or provided to, or payments offered

or made to witnesses, deponents, any potential witness or potential deponent, including
40.

Mr. Schnelle, Ms. Lessing, or Mr. Arnold-Moore.

/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny
Joseph N. Hosteny
Arthur A. Gasey
Niro, Haller & Niro
181 West Madison Street, Suite 4600
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
5

Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Michael R. Cunningham
Attorney No. 20424
GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY,
MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A.
500 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

6

The undersigned hereby certifies that TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

WEST PUBLISHING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6) was served on May
20, 2010 upon West Publishing’s counsel, listed below, by email and first-class mail to:
Mindy Sooter; [e-mail]
Terry Beyl; [e-mail]
Katherine S. Razavi; [e-mail]
Kevin P. Wagner; [e-mail]
David Gross; [e-mail]
Calvin L. Litsey; [e-mail]
Theodore M. Budd; [e-mail]
Faegre & Benson LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center
90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Phone: 612‐766‐7000
Fax: 612‐766‐1600

Attorneys for West Publishing Corporation
/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny

TIMEBASE PTY LTD.,
vs.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Plaintiff,

THE THOMSON CORPORATION, WEST
PUBLISHING CORPORATION, AND WEST
SERVICES, INC.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

File No. 07-CV-1687 (JNE/JJG)

TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
OF WEST SERVICES, INC. PURSUANT
TO RULE 30(b)(6)

TimeBase will depose defendant West Services, Inc. (“West Services”) pursuant to

Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) at the offices of Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A., 500 IDS

Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, beginning at 9:30 a.m. on

July 16, 2010 (or at any other mutually convenient time and location) and continuing from
day-to-day until completed. The deposition will be taken by stenographic means and may
be videotaped as well.

As provided by Rule 30(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., West Services must designate one or

more officers, directors, managing agents or other persons who consent to testify upon its

behalf and who have knowledge of, and are adequately prepared to testify about the topics
set forth below.

“Accused” includes the products and services identified in TimeBase’s Second
DEFINITIONS

Amended Complaint and in TimeBase’s Supplemental Infringement Claim Chart with
exhibits.

When TimeBase says “for example” or “including” in a topic, it is illustrating the

topic, not limiting or restricting it.

Communications and meetings with TimeBase or its representatives or
TOPICS

agents including, for example, BMG and Jon Klemens.
1.

Information possessed or obtained about TimeBase from any source,

including third parties.
2.

Knowledge of TimeBase’s intellectual property including the patents

asserted in this litigation.
3.

Any analysis of TimeBase’s intellectual property, including any advice,

opinions, studies or communications regarding the infringement, validity, or enforceability
4.

of the patents asserted in this litigation.

Facts relevant to willful infringement, and any actions taken in response to

steps taken to avoid infringement.
5.

Any attempts to design around the patents in suit, including any

consideration of alternative(s) to any accused products or services.
6.

The basis for filing any request to reexamine the patents in

suit, and the selection of document(s) submitted with such requests.
7.

8.

invalidity.
9.

The design and operation of each accused product or service.

The facts supporting the defendants’ contentions of non-infringement and
The physical location of and configuration of databases used with any

accused product or service, and the division and storage approach to data held in them.
10.

11.

The differences between versioned and non-versioned databases.
2

The buy-versus-develop analysis during the design and development of each

accused product or service.
12.

A description and explanation of Magellan, OSR, OSR II, Bermuda, Novus,

Ampex, Xanadu, Xena, Statmark, ELVIS, DEPTH, Stable table, CP record, RC record, KCITEi
13.

record and FINDORIG record, and seven field mark-up or query.

The earliest date when each accused product or service was available to a

customer or user.
14.

The patenting activities relevant to any accused product or service, including

7,085,755, and any applications including Mr. Spencer or Ms. Agard as an inventor.
15.

16.

The accused products and services that are accessible through WestlawNext.
Licenses, contracts or other agreements entered into or acquired that are

relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service, including the
17.

identification of the relevant documents and parties involved, and including the Shasta
license and any other licenses.
18.

Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Acquisitions, investments in, licenses with, or purchases of assets or

companies relevant to the design, development or use of any accused product or service,
19.

for example, NetScan, including the identification of the asset or company, and the cost.

The revenues and profits related to or produced by the accused products or

services, including from customers or users outside the United States.
20.

Any analysis of the percentage of customer use or revenue or

anticipated use or revenue related to any accused product or service broken down on a
21.

feature by feature basis.

3

Forecasts, projections, estimates, strategic plans or the like relevant to the

accused products or services, including anticipated costs, profits and benefits of any kind.
22.

Any analysis, including but not limited to any surveys, of

customer demand or customer use related to any accused product or service.
23.

Contracts with customers or users, for example, El Paso, Fresno County or

Tarrant County, including customers or users outside the United States.
24.

Communications with customers or users, or potential customers or users,

including customers or users outside the United States.
25.

The identities of customers for or users of the accused products or services,

including customers or users outside the United States.
26.

Marketing and advertising activities and communications relevant to the

accused products and services.
27.

The pricing strategy, pricing plans, subscriptions, bundles, and discounts for

the accused products and services.
28.

Activities designed to distinguish any accused product or service from

services offered by competitors, such as Lexis.
29.

30.

An explanation of master brands, features, product brands and sunsets.

Facts bearing on the timing and content of a hypothetical negotiation to

determine a reasonable royalty, for example, as discussed in TimeBase’s response to the
31.

defendants’ Interrogatory 4.

Facts relevant to the amount of damages should the defendant be found

liable for infringement.
32.

4

Knowledge of the references cited in West Services’ original and

supplemental prior art statements, including when the defendant learned of any of the
33.

references.
34.

The level of ordinary skill in the art for the patents asserted in this litigation.

The factual basis for the answer and affirmative defenses, including the steps

or structure in any accused product or service that is a basis for non-infringement.
35.

36.

Contacts with SAIC or Timothy Arnold-Moore.

The documents produced by West Services, including the search for and

collection of documents in response to TimeBase’s requests.
37.

West Services responses to TimeBase’s interrogatories, including all aspects

of subscription, revenue and usage based figures provided including formulas collection
38.

methodology and accuracy.

The organization and types of documents maintained by the defendant,

either electronically or in paper form, that specify the design, construction and use of the
39.

accused products and services, and the databases used with them, including DTDs,
schemas, software specifications and the like.

Communications with, benefits offered or provided to, or payments offered

or made to witnesses, deponents, or any potential witness or potential deponent, including
40.

Mr. Schnelle, Ms. Lessing, or Mr. Arnold-Moore.

/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny
Joseph N. Hosteny
Arthur A. Gasey
Niro, Haller & Niro
181 West Madison Street, Suite 4600
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
5

Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Michael R. Cunningham
Attorney No. 20424
GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY,
MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A.
500 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

6

The undersigned hereby certifies that TIMEBASE’S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

WEST SERVICES, INC. PURSUANT TO RULE 30(b)(6) was served on May 20, 2010 upon
West Services’ counsel, listed below, by email and first-class mail to:
Mindy Sooter; [e-mail]
Terry Beyl; [e-mail]
Katherine S. Razavi; [e-mail]
Kevin P. Wagner; [e-mail]
David Gross; [e-mail]
Calvin L. Litsey; [e-mail]
Theodore M. Budd; [e-mail]
Faegre & Benson LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center
90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Phone: 612‐766‐7000
Fax: 612‐766‐1600
Attorneys for West Services, Inc.

/s/ Joseph N. Hosteny