Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al
MOTION for Leave for Additional Time to Serve Certain Pre-Trial Documents by Google Inc., YouTube, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of M. Jones, # 2 Exhibit 1 - 110111 email from Jones, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Jones, Michael)
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 2:05 PM
Subject: Eolas v. Google
You will recall that we corresponded a little about trying to narrow the issues in the above referenced case with regard
to Google. You indicated that you were going to get back with your team to see if we might have a meeting on this so as
to discuss not only narrowing the issues but also a possible plan for the conduct of the trial of the case.
I thought I might give you a little more information with regard to narrowing the issues. There are numerous products in
this case for which Eolas seeks little or no damages. It seems that the inclusion of these products in this case
unnecessarily complicates the case.
For example, the following products have a very low total of the amount of damages:
Finance ($1,909 = 0.001% of total damages)
Analytics ($2,241 = 0.001% of total damages)
Picasa ($4,781 = 0.003% of total damages)
Voice ($5,907 = 0.003% of total damages)
Sketchup ($8,709 = 0.005% of total damages)
News ($15,713 = 0.009% of total damages)
Orkut ($46,653 = 0.026% of total damages)
(Note: Given the stipulation regarding pre‐suit damages, all numbers are post‐suit damages as calculated in the
Weinstein Report. These products add up to $85,913 total, which is still less than 0.05% of the total damages. The next
biggest damages number is $1.10 million for Video, which is 0.6% of the total damages. After that is Instant at $5.55
million, or 3.1% of the total damages.)
(Note on Orkut: Unlike most Google sites where approximately 50% of users are in the U.S., based on publicly available
information I’ve found, only about 2.2% of Orkut’s users are in the U.S. So damages for Orkut should be closer to $2,000
In addition to these products for which Eolas seeks very low damages, there are also products as to which Eolas seeks no
damages. These products include the following:
(1) Google’s Chrome Browser
(2) Google’s Android Browser
(4) Google Music
(5) Google Instant
As you know, Judge Davis has really encouraged us to narrow issues and come up with an efficient way to conduct this
case. It seems to me that doing something about these products would make a lot of sense and it also seems to me that
there may be other ways to simplify the case if we all talked about it. These are my thoughts. I look forward to talking
to you and your team about these ideas whenever you get a chance.
Michael E. Jones
-----------------------------A Professional Corporation
physical: 110 North College, Suite 500; Tyler TX 75702
telephone: 903-597-8311 ext. 239
This electronic message and all other electronic (including voice) communications from the law firm of Potter Minton, A Professional
Corporation, are for informational purposes only and only as to the intended recipient thereof.
This electronic message transmission contains information which may be confidential, protected by the attorney-client privilege,
protected by other evidentiary privileges, and/or protected by the work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the content of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.
Please also virus check all attachments to prevent widespread contamination and corruption of files and operating systems. Furthermore,
unless expressly stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message should be construed as a digital or electronic signature.
To the extent that this communication (or any attachment hereto) contains any statement regarding Federal taxes, that statement was not
written or intended to be used, and it cannot be used for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (2) to
promote, market, or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed therein. Opinion, conclusions and other
information that do not relate directly to the official business of Potter Minton are not given or endorsed by Potter Minton. Legal advice
can be given only by attorneys and may be relied upon only by clients of Potter Minton.
Thank you for your cooperation, and to learn more about our firm, please visit our website at http://www.potterminton.com.
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?