ESN LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 55

*WITHDRAWN PER ORDER # 122 * MOTION to Amend/Correct Invalidity Contentions by Cisco Systems, Inc., Cisco-Linksys LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Affidavit Sharper Declaration, # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Smith, Kevin) Modified on 9/11/2009 (mrm, ).

Download PDF
Exhibit D g111D11 Cmanow trial lawyers I silicon valley 555 '[win Dolphin Drive, Suite 56o, Redwood Shores, California 94065 I TEL 650-1101-5000 PAX 650- 801-5100 May 8, 2008 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL WRITER'S INTERNET ADDRESS victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com Peter J. McAndrews McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd. 500 West Madison Street 34th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60661 Re: ESN, LLC v. Cisco LSystems, Inc., and Cisco-Linksm LLC Dear Mr. McAndrews: I write to address the deficiencies in ESN's P.R. 3-1 Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions served on April 18, 2008. As set forth below, ESN's infringement contentions fall far short of meeting the requirements of Local Patent Rule 3-1. Local Patent Rule 3-1(c) states that "a party claiming patent infringement must serve on all parties .... a chart identifying specifically where each element of each asserted claim is found within each Accused Instrumentality , including for each element that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), the identify of the structure ( s), act(s), or material ( s) in the Accused Instrumentality that performs the claim function." P.R. 3-1(c). Compliance with P.R. 3-1, therefore, requires ESN to set forth "particular theories of infringement with sufficient specificity to provide defendants with notice of infringement." STMicroelectronics, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 308 F. Supp. 2d 754. 754, 755 (E.D. Tex. 2004). Furthermore, infringement contentions "providing vague, conclusory language or simply mimicking the language of the claims when identifying infringement fail to comply with Patent Rule 3-1." Connectel, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 391 F. Supp. 2d 526, 528 (E.D. Tex. 2005). ESN's purported infringement charts are conclusory and unsupported. ESN provided four charts that allegedly mapped each element of the 16 asserted claims to the Accused Instrumentality. Yet, the charts contain not a single citation to a Cisco or third-party publication in support of these contentions. Indeed, the charts fail to provide any evidentiary support whatsover for mien emeneel arpehart sliver a, hedges, lip LOS ANGELES 1 865 South Figueroa Street, Ioth Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017 TEL 213-443-3000 FAX 213-443-3100 NEW YORK 151 Madison Avenue, zznd Floor, New York, New York Ioo1o1 TEL 2IZ-849-7000 FAX ZIZ-849-7100 SAN FRANC ISCO 5o California Street, 2znd Floor, San Francisco, California 94TIr i TEL 415 -875-66o0 FAX 415-875-6700 ESN's allegations. This failure to cite to any evidence does not comport with the Local Patent Rules . See STMicroelectronics , 308 F . Supp. 2d at 756 ("[T] he Court will not tolerate gamesmanship that attempts to conceal or delay the production of discoverable items.") In Connectel, the plaintiff provided over 600 footnotes in its infringement charts, but failed to "specifically identify" where in the cited publications each elements of the asserted claims were found. Connectel, 391 F. Supp. 2d at 527. The court held that the plaintiff failed to comply with P.R. 3-1, and ordered the plaintiff to amend the charts "to highlight ... the text of every piece of cited literature where elements of the asserted claims are found." Id. at 528. Here, ESN has provided far less than the plaintiff in Connectel before the court ordered the plaintiff to amend its charts. In order to comply with P.R. 3-1(c), ESN must: (1) provide citations to documentary evidence for its contentions, and (2) specifically identify where in the cited publications each elements of the asserted claims for each Accused Instrumentality is found. Please let me know by May 16, 2008 if ESN will amend its infringement contentions to meet these requirements. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Victoria F. Maroulis 51301/2495278,1 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?