Rosetta Stone LTD v. Google Inc.
Filing
205
Proposed Voir Dire by Rosetta Stone LTD. (Allen, Warren)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
____________________________________
ROSETTA STONE LTD.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
GOOGLE INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
____________________________________)
Civ. Action No. 1:09-cv-00736(GBL/TCB)
ROSETTA STONE’S PROPOSED VOIR DIRE
In addition to the Court’s standard inquiry, Plaintiff Rosetta Stone Ltd. respectfully
requests that prospective jurors be asked the following technology and case-related questions:
1.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever worked for, or applied to work for,
Google or Rosetta Stone?
2.
Have you ever owned stock in either Google or Rosetta Stone?
3.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever had any training or experience in
computer science, software development, information technology or a related
field?
4.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever had any training or experience in
trademarks, patents, or copyrights, or in any other area of the law?
5.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever worked for a company that was involved
in a trademark, copyright or patent dispute?
6.
Do you have a Gmail account?
7.
Do you belong to any social networking sites such as Google’s Orkut, Facebook,
MySpace, or Twitter?
8.
Do you think that BiTorrent sites or peer to peer file sharing sites, such as
eDonkey, Gnutella, Rapidshare or Usenet, should be allowed to provide free
downloads of software?
9.
Are you a supporter of “open-source” software?
10.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever advertised or sold goods through Google?
11.
Do you regularly read computer- or technology-oriented magazines?
12.
Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, maintain a weblog,
or blog or have a personal website?
13.
Have you purchased or used Rosetta Stone language products to learn another
language?
14.
Have you purchased or used a brand of software other than Rosetta Stone to learn
a foreign language?
15.
Do you think that companies like Napster that provided free downloads of music
should be allowed to do this?
16.
Have you ever been involved in negotiating the terms of a legal contract?
17.
Have you, or someone close to you, ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a
party or a witness?
18.
Have you ever had any experience with, or do you have any connection with, any
of the individuals or entities whose names I will now read to you:
Google
LitiNomics
NERA
Ocean Tomo
Rosetta Stone
Tom Adams
Edward Blair
Jason Calhoun
Terri Chen
Daniel Dulitz
Eric Eichmann
Prashant Fuloria
Baris Gultekin
Rose Hagan
Alana Karen
Van Leigh
Bill Lloyd
Corey Louie
James Malackowski
Nino Ninov
Larry Page
Nicole Tabatabai
Kent Van Liere
Michael Wagner
Susan Wojcicki
Michael Wu
2
Respectfully submitted,
April 26, 2010
Of Counsel:
Mitchell S. Ettinger
(Pro hac vice)
Clifford M. Sloan
(Pro hac vice)
Jennifer L. Spaziano
(Pro hac vice)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP
1440 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2111
/s/
Warren T. Allen II
Virginia Bar Number 72691
Attorney for Plaintiff Rosetta Stone Ltd.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP
1440 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2111
(202) 371-7000
(202) 393-5760
wtallen@skadden.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on April 26, 2010 I will electronically file the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will then send a notification of such filing
(NEF) to the following:
Jonathan D. Frieden
ODIN, FELDMAN & PETTLEMAN, P.C.
9302 Lee Highway, Suite 1100
Fairfax, VA 22031
jonathan.frieden@ofplaw.com
Counsel for Defendant, Google Inc.
April 26, 2010
Date
/s/
Warren T. Allen II (Va. Bar No. 72691)
Attorney for Rosetta Stone Ltd.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
1440 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2111
Telephone: (202) 371-7000
Facsimile: (202) 393-5760
Warren.Allen@skadden.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?