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

Filing 329

Declaration re 327 MOTION to Exclude (Preclude) Dr. Ophir Frieder From Testifying Regarding Untimely Opinions that were Not Disclosed in his Original Expert Report and Opinions that he Now Concedes are Incorrect MOTION to Exclude (Preclude) Dr. Ophir Frieder From Testifying Regarding Untimely Opinions that were Not Disclosed in his Original Expert Report and Opinions that he Now Concedes are Incorrect of Jennifer Ghaussy by AOL Inc., Gannett Company, Inc., Google Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Target Corporation. (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)(Noona, Stephen)

EXHIBIT D

Jim Grossell
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Jen Ghaussy
Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:25 AM
Monterio, Charles
zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition

Charles,
Thank you for confirming you will proceed on August 3. August 3 is the first available date
we can make him available in those weeks.
As you know, we previously offered to make Mr.
Furrow available on July 16, and Plaintiff rejected that date.
Best,
Jen
________________________________________
From: Monterio, Charles [[e-mail]]
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 11:12 AM
To: Jen Ghaussy
Cc: zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
Jen,
With respect to the deposition of Mr. Furrow, we can take the deposition on August 3. It is
I/P Engine’s current understanding that Mr. Furrow is not available any other date the weeks
of July 23 or 30.
Charles
________________________________
From: Jen Ghaussy [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 4:56 PM
To: Monterio, Charles
Cc: zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
Charles,
Thank you for confirming you do not intend to proceed on July 16.
Furrow.

We have informed Mr.

Mr. Furrow is not available on July 26, but he is available on August 3.
promptly whether August 3 works for Plaintiff.

Please let us know

Please note that our position regarding supplementation of any expert report by Plaintiff
based on Mr. Furrow’s deposition remains the same as expressed in my July 10 email below.
Thanks,
Jen
From: Monterio, Charles [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 12:54 PM
To: David Perlson; Jen Ghaussy
Cc: zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
1

Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
David,
With respect to the deposition of Mr. Furrow, we are not available Monday, July 16.
propose in the alternative Thursday, July 26.

We

Charles
________________________________
From: David Perlson [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:33 AM
To: Jen Ghaussy; Monterio, Charles
Cc: zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
Counsel, we have not yet received confirmation that Plaintiff intends to proceed with Mr.
Furrow’s deposition on July 16.
Given the timing, we would appreciate Plaintiff informing
us promptly of its intentions.
In all events, if we do not obtain confirmation by 1 pm PT
today, we will no longer be able to offer Mr. Furrow on July 16.
David
From: Jen Ghaussy
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 5:12 PM
To: Monterio, Charles
Cc: zz-IPEngine; QE-IP Engine; [e-mail]; Stephen E. Noona
Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
Charles,
Bartholomew Furrow is not available on your requested date. He is, however, available this
Monday, July 16. Please confirm whether Plaintiff will proceed on this date.
We note that
the date in Plaintiff’s notice Mr. Furrow was two weeks after the due date for Opening expert
reports. Please be aware that to the extent that Plaintiff intends to depose Mr. Furrow
after its Opening expert infringement report is due and supplement that report later, Google
will object to any such supplementation.
Further, Plaintiff’s attempt to notice the 30(b)(1) deposition of “the Google-employed
marketing person that is primarily responsible for and most knowledgeable of Google’s
marketing of Google AdWords and AdSense for Search” is improper. A 30(b)(1) deposition
notice must name an individual. See Cummings v. General Motors Corp., 2002 WL 32713320, *6
(W.D. Okla. June 18, 2002) (FRCP 30(b)(1) “by its terms imposes no duty on the party
receiving the notice to supply the identity of deponents described by class or group”). In
addition, this notice is duplicative of the 30(b)(6) notices served on Google. Jonathan
Alferness was the designee for the marketing-related topics; to the extent that Plaintiff has
questions about Google’s marketing, it had the opportunity to ask them in that nearly 10hour-long deposition. Furthermore, pursuant to the parties’ agreement, Plaintiff is entitled
to the 30(b)(1) depositions only of witnesses whose names appear in Google’s initial
disclosures. As you know, your motion on in this issue is currently pending before the
Court; no matter what the outcome, however, Plaintiff’s attempt to use FRCP 30(b)(1) to
reach a person “most knowledgeable” is improper.
Thank you,
Jen
From: Chagnon, Armands [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 3:06 PM
To: QE-IP Engine; Stephen E. Noona; '[e-mail]'
Cc: zz-IPEngine
Subject: I/P Engine v. AOL et. al. Notices of Deposition
2

Counsel,
Attached please find the Notice of Deposition of Bartholomew Furrow and the Notice of
Deposition of the Google-Employed Marketing Person Primarily Responsible for and Most
Knowledgeable of Google's Marketing of Google Adwords and Adsense for Search.
Regards,
Armands
Armands Chagnon | Senior Paralegal
DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
1825 Eye Street NW | Washington, DC 20006 Tel [phone] | Fax [phone]
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Confidentiality Statement
This email message and any attached files are confidential and are intended solely for the
use of the addressee(s) named above. This communication may contain material protected by
attorney-client, work product, or other privileges. If you are not the intended recipient or
person responsible for delivering this confidential communication to the intended recipient,
you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing, copying, or other distribution of this email message and any attached files is
strictly prohibited. Dickstein Shapiro reserves the right to monitor any communication that
is created, received, or sent on its network. If you have received this confidential
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email message and
permanently delete the original message.

To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Dickstein Shapiro LLP
www.DicksteinShapiro.com<http://www.DicksteinShapiro.com>
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________

3