Rockstar Consortium US LP et al v. Google Inc

Filing 138

RESPONSE in Opposition re 122 MOTION to Strike Plaintiffs' Patent Rule 3-1 Infringement Contentions filed by NetStar Technologies LLC, Rockstar Consortium US LP. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Shawn D. Blackburn, # 2 Exhibit 1 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions, # 3 Exhibit 2 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '065, # 4 Exhibit 3 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '969, # 5 Exhibit 4 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '245, # 6 Exhibit 5 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '970, # 7 Exhibit 6 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '178, # 8 Exhibit 7 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '183, # 9 Exhibit 8 - Rockstar's P.R. 3-1 Infringement Claim Chart for '883, # 10 Exhibit 9 - 4-14-14 email between counsel, # 11 Exhibit 10 - 4-18-14 email between counsel, # 12 Exhibit 11 - 7-3-14 email between counsel, # 13 Exhibit 12 - 7-8-14 email between counsel, # 14 Exhibit 13 - 7-24-14 email between counsel, # 15 Exhibit 14 - 8-27-14 email between counsel, # 16 Exhibit 15 - 6-23-14 email between counsel, # 17 Text of Proposed Order)(Blackburn, Shawn)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT 9 Case 2:13-cv-00893-JRG-RSP Document 122-2 Filed 08/08/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 3131 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Andrea P Roberts Monday, April 14, 2014 11:56 AM;;;;;;; Mark Mann;;; QE-Google-Rockstar Rockstar v. Google Counsel, I write regarding Rockstar’s infringement contentions. First, Rockstar’s assertion of 144 claims in 7 patents is unreasonable. As a practical matter, this is far too many. Not only is it extremely difficult for Google to analyze Rockstar’s infringement contentions, but it will greatly increase the volume of Google’s invalidity contentions, which will be a burden to all parties. Moreover, Rockstar cannot possibly try anything remotely close to 144 claims and must know that it will, at least eventually, have to reduce the number of asserted claims. Indeed, under the Court’s Model Order Focusing Patent Claims and Prior Art to Reduce Costs, Rockstar will need to limit itself to 32 asserted claims by the close of claim construction discovery. Rockstar should reduce the number of asserted claims now, before Google serves its invalidity contentions under P.R. 33. Please confirm that Rockstar will do so by Friday, April 18. Second, Rockstar’s infringement contentions, while voluminous due to the number of asserted claims, do not provide sufficient specificity to put Google on notice of what functionalities Rockstar contends infringes the asserted patents. Without such specificity, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Google to identify “documentation sufficient to show the operation” of such accused functionalities, as required by P.R. 3-4, or to do so by May 19, much less determine what other documents or source code is relevant to Rockstar’s infringement contentions. We request that Rockstar provide more specificity as to what is accused. Please confirm that Rockstar will do so by Friday, April 18. If Rockstar does not agree to either of the above, please provide a time this week when Rockstar is available to meet and confer on these issues. Thanks, Andrea Andrea Pallios Roberts Of Counsel, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 650-801-5023 Direct 650.801.5000 Main Office Number 650.801.5100 FAX NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?