Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 389

MOTION to Strike the Untimely Supplemental Expert Rebuttal Report of John Levy, Ph.D. Regarding Validity and To Preclude Dr. Levy from Testifying at Trial About His New Opinions by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of J. Randall, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2 (Part 1 of 2), # 4 Exhibit 2 (Part 2 of 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)(Randall, Jeffrey)

Download PDF
Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc. Doc. 389 Att. 12 Exhibit 10 Dockets.Justia.com Page 1 of 2 From: Sent: To: Cc: Soobert, Allan M. Thursday, July 22, 2010 8:38 PM 'asolo@stroock.com' 'MW_v_Apple@stroock.com'; Mirror Worlds Subject: RE: MW: Status of Disputes & Proposed Agreement Alex, Here is the list of 10 references, for point 3 below, which again remains subject to Mirror Worlds' identification of the claims that it intends to present at trial. 1. Robin Lee Kullberg, "Dynamic Timelines Visualizing Historical Information in Three Dimensions, Master of Science Thesis, MIT (1995). 2. William M. Newman, "A system for interactive graphical programming," ACM Spring Joint Computer Conference (1968). 3. Beverly L. Harrison et al., "Timelines: An Interactive System for the Collection and Visualization of Temporal Data," Appeared in Proceedings of Graphics Interface '94, pp. 141-148 (1994). 4. Robert Spence et al., "Data base navigation: an office environment for the professional," Behavior and Information Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 43-54 (1982). 5. Ben Shneiderman, "The Eyes Have It: A Task by Data Type Taxonomy for Information Visualizations," Proc. Visual Languages (Sept. 1996). 6. Brett Milash et al., "Lifelines: Visualizing Personal Histories," (DVD) (April 1995). 7. Musthaler, "A tall order for document managers" in Network World, pp. 35-40 (1994). 8. McCotter et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,401,097 "System and Method for Integrated Document Management and Related Transmission and Access" (1998). 9. Kappes et al., "Document Management for the Knowledge Worker System" in US Army Corps of Engineers USACERL ADP Report 95/38 (1995). 10. Seiden et al., "Information Retrieval Systems for Microcomputers" in Library Hi Tech, Vol. 3, Iss. 1, pp. 41-54 (1985). Please let us know if our proposal is acceptable. Thanks, Allan From: Soobert, Allan M. Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:26 PM To: asolo@stroock.com Cc: MW_v_Apple@stroock.com; Mirror Worlds Subject: MW: Status of Disputes & Proposed Agreement Alex, As we discussed yesterday, we are pleased that the parties are making substantial progress in resolving various disputes and eliminating the need for the Court to be burdened with such issues. We understand that Mirror Worlds is satisfied with Apple's golden master document production, which resolves Mirror Worlds' motion to compel. We also understand that Mirror Worlds has agreed to drop its request for Steve Jobs to appear as a witness in the case, in exchange for Apple's agreement that it will not object to the two Steve Jobs emails on the grounds that they are not authentic business records--which is acceptable to Apple. So, that resolves the Steve Jobs' issue as well. Page 2 of 2 On the parties' respective requests for leave to amend their invalidity contentions (and the corresponding motions to strike), we understand that Mirror Worlds is amenable to resolving this dispute and is considering our proposal, which would permit both parties to amend their invalidity contentions. To make sure we are all on the same page, here is what we propose for the agreement on contentions: 1. Mirror Worlds would be permitted to raise its invalidity defense to the Piles patents and use the Nicol, Levine and SDMS work as invalidating references. 2. Apple would be permitted to challenge the validity of the Mirror Worlds patents based on the (i) the Workscape/MAYA work (Feiner Exs. 4A-4D); (ii) the SDMS work (Feiner Exs. BA-BD); and (iii) the Memoirs/Lansdale work (Feiner Exs. CA-CD). 3. Apple agrees to limit the number of references cited in its state of the art chart (Feiner Exs. DA-DD) that it plans to use as invalidating references to 10 references (reserving Apple's right to modify the list of 10 references subject to Mirror Worlds' identification of the specific claims that it plans to present at trial). We will forward the list of 10 references to you later today. 4. This agreement does not preclude Apple from relying on the references cited in the Background section of Dr. Feiner's invalidity report as context and background on the development of the technology. Apple would not similarly object to Mirror Worlds' use of such state of the art references as context and background. Neither party would use such references as invalidating references. As part of the above agreement on contentions, Apple would be willing to (i) withdraw its motion to compel, including its challenges to Mirror Worlds' privilege claims and (ii) drop its potential spoliation claim for Mirror Worlds' failure to preserve documents. Please let us know if our proposal is acceptable. In the meantime, we will follow-up with the list of 10 references in point 3 above shortly. Thanks, Allan ___________________________________________________________________ Allan M. Soobert | Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP | 875 15th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20005 | direct: 202 551 1822 | main: 202 551 1700 | direct fax: 202 551 0222 | allansoobert@paulhastings.com | www.paulhastings.com Paul Hastings is committed to sustainable practices. Reducing printed waste saves resources.

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?