Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 73

NOTICE by Apple, Inc. of Withdrawal of Subpoena to David Gelernter (Smith, Stefani)

Download PDF
Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc. Doc. 73 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION MIRROR WORLDS, LLC Plaintiff, vs. APPLE INC. Defendant. Civil Action No. 6:08-CV-88 LED NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF SUBPOENA TO DAVID GELERNTER PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Apple Inc. hereby withdraws the attached subpoena directed to David Gelernter. Dated: March 22, 2009 Respectfully submitted, _/s/ Stefani C. Smith Matthew D. Powers Lead Attorney Sonal N. Mehta (Pro Hac Vice) Stefani C. Smith (Pro Hac Vice) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 650-802-3000 (Telephone) 650-802-3100 (Facsimile) matthew.powers@weil.com sonal.mehta@weil.com stefani.smith@weil.com Eric M. Albritton Texas State Bar No. 00790215 ALBRITTON LAW FIRM P.O. Box 2649 Longview, Texas 75606 (903) 757-8449 (phone) (903) 758-7397 (fax) ema@emafirm.com Attorneys for Defendant Apple Inc. SV1:\307875\01\6LK301!.DOC\15096.0011 Dockets.Justia.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) on this 22nd day of March, 2009. As of this date, all counsel of record that have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document through the Court's CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). /s/ Stefani C. Smith Stefani C. Smith SV1:\307875\01\6LK301!.DOC\15096.0011 2 Case 6:08-cv-00088-LED Document 72-2 Filed 03/11/2009 Page 1 of 2 Issued by the United States District Court SOUTHERN MIRROR WORLDS, LLC, DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Plaintiff v. APPLE INC., SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE CASE NUMBER: i 6:08 cv 88 LED (Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division) Defendant. TO: David Gelernter c/o Harold Rose, Esq. Offce of the General Counsel Yale University 2 Whitney A venue, 6th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 (J YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District Court at the place, date, and time specified below to testify in the above case. PLACE OF TESTIMONY COURTROOM DATE AND TIME o YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place, date, and time specified below to testify at the taking of a deposition in the above case. PLACE OF DEPOSITION DATE AND TIME Wei! Gotshal & Manges, LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10022 Apri! 10, 2009 9:00 am (J YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of objects at the place, date, and time specified below (list documents or objects): PLACE YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following documents or DATE AND TIME the following premises at the date and time specified below. DATE AND TIME PREMISES Any organization not a part to this suit that is subpoenaed for the taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for -".- ('- ",' ,- - . ATTORNEY~~ ~ IANT APPLE INC. _ ISSUING OFFICER each person designated, the matters on which the person wil testify. Federal Rules ofCivi! Procedure. JO(b)(6). M 'I TITLE (IN2Ai IJA TTO~Y F~NTIFF OR DEFENDANT) DATE March i 1, 2009 ISSUING OFFICER'S NAME, ADD~ SS AND PHONE NUMBER Stefani C. Smith, Wei!, Gotshal & Manges LLP, 201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Redwood Shores, CA 94065; Telephone (650) 802-3000 (See Rule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Parts C & D on Reverse) If action is pending in district other than district of issuance, state district under case number. Case 6:08-cv-00088-LED Document 72-2 Filed 03/11/2009 Page 2 of 2 PROOF OF SERVICE DATE PLACE SERVED SERVED ON (PRINT NAM) MANNR OF SERVICE SERVED BY (PRINT NAM) TITLE DECLARA TlON OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. Executed on DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ADDRESS OF SERVER Rule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Parts C & D: (c) PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECT TO SUBPOENAS. (I) A party or an attorney responsible for the issuance and service of a subpoena shall take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to that subpoena. The court on behalf of which the subpoena was issued shall enforce this duty and impose upon the party or attorney in breach of this duty an appropriate sanction, which may include, but is not limited to, lost earnings and a reasonable attorney's fee. that, subject to the provisions of clause (c)(3)(B)(iii) of this rule, such a person may in order to attend trial be commanded to travel from any such place within the state in which the trial is held, or (iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter and no exception or waiver applies, or (iv) subjects a person to undue burden. (B) If a subpoena (2)(A) A person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of designated books, papers, documents or tangible things, or inspection of premises need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless commanded to appear for deposition, hearing or triaL. (i) requires disclosure of a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, or (ii) required disclosure of an unretained expert's opinion or information not describing specific events or occurrences in dispute and resulting from the expert's permit inspection and copying may, within 14 days after service the of (B) Subject to paragraph (d)(2) of this rule, a person commanded to produce and subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than i 4 days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect and copy the materials or study made not at the request of any part, or (iii) requires a person who is not a party or an offcer of a party to incur substantial expense to travel more than i 00 miles to attend trial, the court may, to protect a the person subject to or affected by the subpoena, quash or modiry the subpoena or, if party in whose behalf the subpoena is issued shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship and assures that the person to whom the subpoena is addressed will be reasonably compensated, the court may order appearance or production only upon specified conditions. inspect the premises except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued. If objection has been made, the party serving the subpoena may, upon notice to the person commanded to produce, move at any time for an order to compel the production. Such an order to compel production shall protect any person who is not a party or an offcer of a pary from significant expense resulting from the inspection and copying commanded. (d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. (1) A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents shall produce them as (3)(A) On timely motion, the court by which a subpoena was issued shall quash or modiry the subpoena if it they are kept in the usual course of business or shall organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the demand. more than 100 miles from the place where that person resides, is employed or regularly transacts business in person, except (i) fails to allow reasonable time for compliance; (ii) requires a person who is not a part or an offcer of a party to travel to a place (2) When information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim that is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation materials, the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced that is suffcient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim. 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?