Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Filing 585

Additional Attachments to Main Document: 583 Response to Motion.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Wiley Declaration, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E)(Wiley, Elizabeth)

Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Doc. 585 Att. 6

EXHIBIT E

Dockets.Justia.com

Andrew Spangler
From: Sent: To: Subject: David Pridham <[e-mail]> Sunday, August 01, 2010 5:41 PM Andrew Spangler Fw: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

From: David Perlson <[e-mail]> To: 'Rooklidge, William' <[e-mail]>; Marc Fenster; David Pridham Sent: Sun Aug 01 17:08:00 2010 Subject: RE: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

Hey David, as I am sure you can understand we would like to lock this down for our demonstratives etc... If we don't hear back in the next ten minutes or so we plan to file something noting our agreement with your motion Friday which basically is consistent with the stip. Thanks, David
From: Rooklidge, William [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 4:35 PM To: David Perlson; [e-mail]; [e-mail] Subject: Re: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

You have Yahoo!'s authorization. Thanks. Bill William C. Rooklidge Partner HOWREY LLP 4 Park Plaza, Suite 1700 Irvine, CA 92614 Direct: +1 949.759.3904 Fax: [phone] [e-mail] www.howrey.com Amsterdam Brussels Chicago East Palo Alto Houston Irvine London Los Angeles Madrid Munich New York Northern Virginia Paris Salt Lake City San Francisco Taipei Washington DC

From: David Perlson <[e-mail]> To: '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; Rooklidge, William; '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]> Sent: Sun Aug 01 17:26:55 2010 Subject: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

I have not heard back from Yahoo! yet, but to move the process along I have accepted David's changes (and set up for signature). Per my discussion with David, Plaintiff does not seek through the addition of the "when relevant" language to preclude Defendants from using the reexamination for purposes relevant to its case and in particular the findings regarding Claims 26 and 28.
1

Do I have everyone's ok? If so, we can file. David
This email and any attachments contain information from the law firm of Howrey LLP, which may be confidential and/or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named on this email. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this email is prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify us by reply email immediately so that we can arrange for the retrieval of the original documents at no cost to you. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. Howrey LLP consists of two separate limited liability partnerships, one formed in the United States (Howrey US) and one formed in the United Kingdom (Howrey UK). Howrey UK is registered in England and Wales under number OC311537 and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (http://www.sra.org.uk/code-of-conduct.page). Howrey's London and Paris offices are operated as part of Howrey UK. A list of the partners of Howrey UK is available for inspection at its registered office: 5 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BF. A consolidated list of all Howrey US and Howrey UK attorneys and jurisdictions where they are authorized to practice and/or are registered can be obtained by contacting [e-mail].

2

Andrew Spangler
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: David Pridham <[e-mail]> Sunday, August 01, 2010 5:42 PM Andrew Spangler Fw: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

From: David Perlson <[e-mail]> To: Marc Fenster; 'Rooklidge, William' <[e-mail]>; David Pridham Sent: Sun Aug 01 16:26:55 2010 Subject: stipulation re claims 28 and 38.DOC

I have not heard back from Yahoo! yet, but to move the process along I have accepted David's changes (and set up for signature). Per my discussion with David, Plaintiff does not seek through the addition of the "when relevant" language to preclude Defendants from using the reexamination for purposes relevant to its case and in particular the findings regarding Claims 26 and 28. Do I have everyone's ok? If so, we can file. David

1