I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 201

Memorandum in Support re 200 MOTION for Sanctions Motion for Discovery Sanctions Regarding Untimely Disclosed Prior Art filed by I/P Engine, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Proposed Order)(Sherwood, Jeffrey)

Exhibit 10 

quinn emanuel trial lawyers | san francisco
50 California Street, 22nd Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-4788 | TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]

WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NO.
[phone]
WRITER'S INTERNET ADDRESS
[e-mail]

March 7, 2012

Charles Monterio
Dickstein Shapiro LLP
1825 Eye Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Re:

I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al.

Dear Charles:
I write to regarding your letter dated March 5, 2012.
In compliance with the parties’ November 4, 2011 stipulation, I/P Engine provided initial noninfringement contentions on November 7 and 11 based on publicly available information. You
agreed to supplement these contentions on February 17, 2012. In addition, I/P Engine
incorporated its contentions into its responses to Interrogatory Nos. 5 and 7, referring to the
contentions as “Pre-Discovery Infringement Contentions.” These disclosures are what we
already met and conferred about and would form the basis of our motion to compel. And while
you now seek to backtrack from your statements and failure to engage on the call, we believe our
summary of the call in our March 2, 2012 letter was accurate.
Google produced technical documents related to Google Search on December 7, 2012, three
months ago. Your failure to review in a timely manner the documents produced in this case does
not excuse your duty to supplement your infringement contentions, particularly in light of the
fact that the documents we have provided show there is no infringement, as your failure to
supplement demonstrates implicitly.
In your letter, you assert that IAC produced technical documents regarding Ask Sponsored
quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp
LOS ANGELES | 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017-2543 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
NEW YORK | 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, New York 10010-1601 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
SILICON VALLEY | 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor, Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
CHICAGO | 500 W. Madison Street, Suite 2450, Chicago, Illinois 60661-2510 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
LONDON | 16 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7EG, United Kingdom | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
TOKYO | NBF Hibiya Bldg., 25F, 1-1-7, Uchisaiwai-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0011, Japan | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
MANNHEIM | Erzbergerstraße 5, 68165 Mannheim, Germany | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]

Listings “only recently,” but IAC produced technical documents concerning ASL on January 17,
2012. I/P Engine has had these documents for seven weeks.
As we have indicated, the lack of clarity as to Plaintiff's reading of the patents prevents us from
being able to supplement our invalidity contentions, if needed, based on them. As we have no
further clarity on Plaintiff's contentions, there is no further art for us to identify in our invalidity
contentions at this time, and, accordingly, nothing to compel.
Very truly yours,

Margaret P. Kammerud
01980.51928/4639766.1

2