APPLE inc. and NEXT Software Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. and Motorola Mobility, Inc

Filing 3

DECLARATION of Brian Cannon in Support re: 1 MOTION to Compel DOCUMENT PRODUCTION AND DEPOSTION FROM JEFFERSON HAN AND PERCEPTIVE PIXEL. Other Court Name: NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Other Court Case Number: 11CV8450. (Filing Fee $ 46.00, Receipt Number 465401029188) MOTION to Compel DOCUMENT PRODUCTION AND DEPOSTION FROM JEFFERSON HAN AND PERCEPTIVE PIXEL. Other Court Name: NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Other Court Case Number: 11CV8450. (Filing Fee $ 46.00, Receipt Number 465401029188). Document filed by Motorola, Inc. and Motorola Mobility, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit, # 7 Exhibit, # 8 Exhibit, # 9 Exhibit, # 10 Exhibit, # 11 Exhibit, # 12 Exhibit, # 13 Exhibit, # 14 Exhibit, # 15 Exhibit)(wb)

EXHIBIT 15

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

APPLE, INC. AND NEXT SOFTWARE,
INC.,

Civil Action No. 10-cv-662 BBC

Plaintiffs,
V.
MOTOROLA, INC., AND MOTOROLA
MOBILITY, INC.,
Defendants.

PERCEPTIVE PIXEL, INC.'S RESPONSE TO
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.'S SUBPOENA
TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS

GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Perceptive Pixel objects to the subpoena generally as providing an undue burden on a
third-party.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the date and time for producing documents. Perceptive Pixel
will produce any responsive documents at a time to be resolved with Defendant.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the subpoena to the extent that each of the topics seeks
information protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product privilege, or
any other privilege.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the subpoena to the extent it seeks information that is not
relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

1

Perceptive Pixel objects to the definitions and instructions to the extent that they impose
burdens on third-party Perceptive Pixel beyond the scope of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the definition of Perceptive Pixel as unduly broad, vague and
ambiguous. Perceptive Pixel, Inc. responds only on its behalf, and will construe the use of the
term "Perceptive Pixel," "you" or "your" to refer only to Perceptive Pixel, Inc.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the definition of Apple as unduly broad and ambiguous.
Perceptive Pixel will construe the use of the term "Apple" in these requests as referring to Apple,
Inc.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the definition of "prior art" as vague, overly broad, and
inconsistent with the legal definitions provided by the Patent Act. Perceptive Pixel will interpret
the term "prior art" consistently with the requirements set forth in the Patent Act.
Perceptive Pixel objects to the definition of the terms "document," "documents," "thing,"
or "things" as overly broad, ambiguous, and inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
Perceptive Pixel's production of documents, if any, is not a waiver of any of the
objections set forth herein.
Perceptive Pixel's responses are based on facts presently known to Perceptive Pixel and
represent a diligent and good faith effort to comply with the requests. Perceptive Pixel's
investigation into the matters defined in Motorola Mobility, Inc.'s subpoena is ongoing, and
Perceptive Pixel reserves the right to supplement, alter or change its responses if additional
information is discovered.

2

Perceptive Pixel objects to the production of documents that are not in Perceptive Pixel's
possession, custody or control.
Perceptive Pixel objects to its deposition, should any documents produced prove to be
irrelevant to any issue in the present action.
These general objections are referred to herein as "general objections" and are
incorporated by reference into each of Perceptive Pixel's specific objections and answers as set
forth in full below. The following answers are made subject to, and in reliance on, these general
objections.
DOCUMENT REQUESTS

REQUEST NO. 1:
Documents relating to Jeff Han's presentation at the TED Conference in February, 2006
in Monterey, California, as referenced in the TED Video.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to

3

lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 2:
Documents relating to the multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED
Conference in February, 2006 in Monterey, California, including documents sufficient to show
the development of that device, the functionality of that device and any other public disclosure or
demonstration of that device, as referenced in the TED Video.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for infoimation that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.

4

Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.
REQUEST NO. 3:

Documents relating to any prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions of the multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED Conference in February,
2006 in Monterey, California, as referenced in the TED Video, including documents sufficient to
show the development of any such prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions, their functionality, and any public disclosure or demonstration of any such prototypes,
predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and versions.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 3:

Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.

Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 4:
Any and all communications, agreements and contracts between Perceptive Pixel and
Apple, its engineers, agents, employees or its counsel, including but not limited to
communications, agreements and contracts with Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP; Covington &
Burling LLP; and Tensegrity Law Group LLP.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 4:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states no such documents
exist.

6

REQUEST NO. 5:
Produce for inspection the multi touch sensor demonstrated by you at the TED
Conference in Monterey, California in February, 2006, and any device reflecting the
functionality present in the device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED Conference in
Monterey, California in February, 2006, as referenced in the TED Video.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 5:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states that the device no
longer exists.

7

REQUEST NO. 6:
Produce for inspection any prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions of the multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED Conference in
Monterey, California in February, 2006, as referenced in the TED Video.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 6:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states that these devices no
longer exist.

REQUEST NO. 7:
Produce for inspection all versions of the source code used to generate the executable
code that ran on the multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED Conference in
Monterey, California in February, 2006, as referenced in the TED Video.

8

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 7:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel farther objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 8:
Produce for inspection all documents that describe the operations of the source code used
to generate the executable code that ran on the multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at
the TED Conference in Monterey, California in February, 2006, as referenced in the TED Video.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 8:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects

9

to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 9:
Documents sufficient to show all individuals that contributed to the development of the
multi touch device demonstrated by Jeff Han at the TED Conference in Monterey, California in
February, 2006, as referenced in the TED Video, and any prototypes, predecessors, builds,
models, samples, demos and versions of the multi touch device.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 9:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client

10

privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel farther objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for infoimation that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 10:
Documents and communications relating to any offer by Apple to purchase Perceptive
Pixel, or any intellectual property rights or business owned by Perceptive Pixel.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 10:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.

11

Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states that no such
documents exist.

REQUEST NO. 11:
Documents relating to the multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo
Reel, including documents sufficient to show the development of that device, the functionality of
that device and ally other public disclosure or demonstration of that device, as referenced in the
January 2006 Demo Reel.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 11:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel farther objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to

12

lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for infoimation that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

REQUEST NO. 12:
Documents relating to any prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions of the multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo Reel, including
documents sufficient to show the development of any such prototypes, predecessors, builds,
models, samples, demos and versions, their functionality, and any public disclosure or
demonstration of any such prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 12:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to

13

lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.
REQUEST NO. 13:

Produce for inspection the multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo
Reel, and any device reflecting the functionality present in the device demonstrated in the
January 2006 Demo Reel.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 13:

Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.

14

Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states that this device no
longer exists.
REQUEST NO. 14:
Produce for inspection any prototypes, predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and
versions of the multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo Reel.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 14:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel states that this device no
longer exists.
REQUEST NO. 15:
Produce for inspection all versions of the source code used to generate the executable
code that ran on the multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo Reel.

15

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 15:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for infoin ation that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.
REQUEST NO. 16:
Produce for inspection all documents that describe the operation of the source code used
to generate the executable code that ran on the multi touch device demonstrated in the January
2006 Demo Reel.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 16:
Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects

16

to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.
REQUEST NO. 17:

Documents sufficient to show all individuals that contributed to the development of the
multi touch device demonstrated in the January 2006 Demo Reel, and any prototypes,
predecessors, builds, models, samples, demos and versions of the multi touch device.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 17:

Perceptive Pixel incorporates by reference its general objections and specific objections
to the definitions, instructions, and requests as if fully set forth herein. Perceptive Pixel objects
to the term "event-driven object oriented programming" as vague and ambiguous. Perceptive
Pixel objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, and/or any other applicable privileges or immunities.

17

Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly
burdensome. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request to the extent it seeks documents that
are publicly available, or that are equally available from sources accessible by Respondents.
Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and as
seeking information that is neither relevant to any claim or defense nor reasonably calculated to
lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Perceptive Pixel further objects to this request as
calling for information that is outside the possession, custody, and control of Perceptive Pixel.
Subject to its general and specific objections, Perceptive Pixel will search for source code
from his 2006 presentations, and if the source code is found, will make the source code available
for inspection under appropriate protective measures.

Dated: November 21, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

-0/
Craig. K fman
FREITAS TSENG & KAUFMAN LLP
100 Marine Parkway, Suite 200
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Counsel for Perceptive Pixel, Inc.

DMS:101386.1

18

PROOF OF SERVICE
I am more than eighteen years old and not a party to this action. My business address is
Freitas Tseng & Kaufman LLP, 100 Marine Parkway, Suite 200, Redwood Shores, California
94025. On November 21, 2011, I served the following document(s):
PERCEPTIVE PIXEL, INC.'S RESPONSE TO MOTOROLA MOBILITY,
INC.'S SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR
OBJECTS
on the interested parties in this action by placing true and correct copies thereof in sealed
envelope(s) addressed as follows:
James M. Glass
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

Meghan E. Bordonaro
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Motorola Mobility, Inc.
(BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I placed the sealed envelope(s) or package(s) designated by
the express service carrier for collection and overnight delivery by following the ordinary
business practices of Freitas Tseng & Kaufman LLP, Redwood City, California. I am readily
familiar with Freitas Tseng & Kaufman LLP's practice for collecting and processing of
correspondence for overnight delivery, said practice being that, in the ordinary course of
business, correspondence for overnight delivery is deposited with delivery fees paid or provided
for at the carrier's express service offices for next-business-day delivery the same day as the
correspondence is placed for collection.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on November 21, 2011, at Redwood Shores, California

Melanie Arlantico