EMG Technology, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 216

REPLY to Response to Motion re 199 MOTION to Vacate 100 Order, 99 Order The Deadlines In The Docket Control And Discovery Orders And For A Case Management Conference MOTION to Vacate 100 Order, 99 Order The Deadlines In The Docket Control And Discovery Orders And For A Case Management Conference filed by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of John R. Lane ISO Apple Inc.'s Reply, # 2 Exhibit A to Lane Declaration, # 3 Exhibit B to Lane Declaration, # 4 Exhibit C to Lane Declaration, # 5 Exhibit D to Lane Declaration, # 6 Exhibit E to Lane Declaration, # 7 Exhibit F to Lane Declaration, # 8 Exhibit G to Lane Declaration, # 9 Exhibit H to Lane Declaration, # 10 Exhibit I to Lane Declaration, # 11 Exhibit J to Lane Declaration, # 12 Exhibit K to Lane Declaration, # 13 Exhibit L to Lane Declaration, # 14 Exhibit M to Lane Declaration, # 15 Exhibit N to Lane Declaration, # 16 Exhibit O to Lane Declaration, # 17 Exhibit P to Lane Declaration)(Healey, David)

Download PDF
EMG Technology, LLC v. Apple, Inc. Doc. 216 Att. 10 Exhibit I Dockets.Justia.com Page 1 of 2 From: Sent: To: Gibson, Stan [SMG@JMBM.com] Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:01 PM John Lane; SHansen@manatt.com Subject: Re: EMG proposed protective order John -- out of the office this week. Will get you comments on Monday. Is Apple moving forward with the search terms on e-mail? Stan Gibson -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) From: John Lane To: Gibson, Stan; Hansen, Shawn Sent: Thu Jul 30 09:57:55 2009 Subject: RE: EMG proposed protective order Stan When can we expect your comments on the protective order? Thanks, John From: Gibson, Stan [mailto:SMG@JMBM.com] Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 7:58 PM To: John Lane; Hansen, Shawn Subject: RE: EMG proposed protective order John, We do have some comments on the protective order. The designations are okay (as long as the attorney eyes only designation is not over used), but we will have some suggested changes on the review of source code. I will get back to you with the other comments in the next few days. Stan From: John Lane [mailto:JLane@fr.com] Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 3:25 PM To: Gibson, Stan; Hansen, Shawn Subject: EMG proposed protective order Stan and Shawn Apple is processing its first batch of documents for production. Some of these documents are confidential, and will need to be designated as such. Can you please let me know if EMG has comments on the attached protective order? If you are not in a position to tell me yet, can you at least let me know if EMG agrees to the confidentiality designations in the attached protective order? Thanks, John John R. Lane ~Fish & Richardson P.C. One Houston Center 1221 McKinney, Suite 2800 Houston, Texas 77010 Page 2 of 2 713-654-5307 Email: jlane@fr.com **************************************************************************************************************************** This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.(FR08-i203d) ****************************************************************************************************************************

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?