Rockstar Consortium US LP et al v. Google Inc
Filing
209
Unopposed MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory to Edouard Gueyffier by Google Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Affidavit Declaration of Michelle Ernst, # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit 2, # 5 Exhibit 3, # 6 Exhibit 4, # 7 Exhibit 5, # 8 Exhibit 6, # 9 Exhibit 7, # 10 Exhibit 8, # 11 Exhibit 9, # 12 Exhibit 10, # 13 Exhibit 11, # 14 Text of Proposed Order)(Perlson, David)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
ROCKSTAR CONSORTIUM US LP
AND NETSTAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOOGLE INC.
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00893-RG
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
DECLARATION OF MICHELLE ERNST IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE INC.’S
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF LETTER OF REQUEST TO EDOUARD
GUEYFFIER
I, Michelle Ernst, declare as follows:
1.
I am an attorney at the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP,
counsel for Defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the
facts stated herein and if called to testify could and would competently testify thereto.
2.
Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the October 31, 2013
Complaint for Patent Infringement.
3.
Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of Google’s January 10, 2014
Answer to Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Patent Infringement.
4.
Attached as Exhibits 3-9 are true and correct copies of the patents-in-suit, U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,098,065; 7,236,969; 7,469,245; 7,672,970; 7,895,178; 7,895,183; and 7,933,883.
5.
Attached as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of Rockstar’s Initial Disclosures.
6.
Attached as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of the Court’s May 13, 2014
Docket Control Order.
7.
Prior to the September 16, 2014 deadline to substantially complete document
discovery, Rockstar had only produced about 10,000 pages of documents relating to conception
and reduction to practice, and the file histories of the patents-in-suit. On September 16, 2014
Rockstar started to produce documents related to the Nortel auction.
8.
On August 6, 2014, Google served document subpoenas pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 45 on Lazard and three former Lazard employees currently residing in the
United States: David Descoteaux, Colin Keenan, and Justin Lux.
9.
On August 20 and August 26, 2014, counsel for Lazard, Mr. Arthur Ruegger at
the law firm, Dentons, advised that he would also be representing Messieurs Descoteaux,
Keenan, and Lux in connection with Google’s Subpoenas.
1
10.
On August 27, 2014, Mr. Ruegger further advised that he would likely be able to
accept service of a Rule 45 Subpoena on behalf of Mr. Gueyffier as well, pending final
confirmation from Lazard.
11.
On September 15, 2014, Mr. Ruegger advised that he would not be able to accept
service on behalf of Mr. Gueyffier.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed October 20, 2014 in New York, New York.
___________________________________________
Michelle Ernst
2
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?