I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al
Filing
106
Declaration re 105 Memorandum in Support of Emily O'Brien by Google Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R, # 19 Exhibit S, # 20 Exhibit T, # 21 Exhibit U, # 22 Exhibit V, # 23 Exhibit W)(Noona, Stephen)
EXHIBIT O
DICKSTEINSHAPI
1825
TEL
Eye
202
NW
Street
ROLLP
DC 20006-5403
Washington
420-2200
29
202
tax
2012
February
420-2201
dicksteinshapiro.com
Via E-mail
David Perison Esq
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart
Sullivan
LLP
50 California Street 22nd Floor
CA
San Francisco
Re
94111
Contentions
Supplemental Infringement
Engines
I/P
Dear David
In response
you
I/P
your February
to
Engine
I/P
documents
portions
support
for
Engines
I/P
that
claim
for
420
incorrect
is
To
claims
to
response
I/P
Defendants should
Engines
664
and
supplement
interrogatories
and
that
Engines
their
accordance
in
opinion
for
contentions
and
each
and cited public and
identified the relevant
substantial
Google
or any
other defendant
of
understanding
Google
contentions
non-infringement
in
Meg
Ken
Infringement
and provides
litigation
the extent
or I/P
patents
Engine has
I/P
by the present
implicated
infringement
the
between
current infringement
its
contentions
those
support
forth
set
emails
Engines Supplemental
I/P
any of the claim limitations are missing
believes
system
to
Ad Words
of Google
and the subsequent
letter
Engine has
claim limitation of each asserted
confidential
2012
your allegations
rejects
are deficient
Contentions
27
with Defendants
in
ongoing discovery
obligations
to
Contrary
your implication
of
sufficiency
I/P
infringement
alleged
evidence
in
support
New
York
contrary to
of certain infringement
prior art onto
the parties
Contentions
does
its
regarding
not
limit
First Defendants have asserted
of their counterclaims
Second
contentions
explanation
Los Angeles
invalidity
Infringement
contentions
between
of invalidity and bear the burden of supporting
counterclaims
Defendants
further
Engines Supplemental
of their
supplementation
judgment
any difference
are
not
your assertions
contentions
are
dependent
Defendants
declaratory
those assertions
on
your request
not necessary
the
for
I/P
for
Engines
I/P
Google
Engines
to
read any
interpretation of the claims
Orange
County
Silicon
Valley
Stamford
Washington
DC
DSMDB-303487
DICKSTEINS HAP
IROLLP
David Perison Esq
February
29
2012
Page
Contrary
Listings
to
your
letter
Engine continues
I/P
of infringing the
420
and
664
to
patents
accuse
as I/P
Google
Search
Engine has
and
asserted
IACs Ask
in
its
Sponsored
infringement
contentions
Best regards
harles
202
Monte
io
Jr
420-5167
MonterioC@dicksteinshapiro.com
CJM
cc
Stephen
Noona
David Bilsker
Kenneth
Jeffrey
DeAnna
Brothers
Sherwood
Allen
DSMDB-303487
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?