I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al
Filing
96
Declaration re 95 Reply to Response to Motion of Margaret Kammerud in Support of Google's Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Conception, Reduction-to-Practice, and Priority Date Information for the Patents-in-Suit by Google Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit L, # 2 Exhibit M, # 3 Exhibit N, # 4 Exhibit O, # 5 Exhibit P, # 6 Exhibit Q)(Noona, Stephen)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
NORFOLK DIVISION
I/P ENGINE, INC.
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-512
V.
AOL, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF MARGARET KAMMERUD IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE'S REPLY
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE CONCEPTION,
REDUCTION-TO-PRACTICE, AND PRIORITY DATE INFORMATION FOR THE
PATENTS-IN-SUIT
I, Margaret P. Kammerud, declare as follows:
1.
I am an attorney in the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and am
counsel for Defendant Google Inc. in the above-captioned case. I provide this declaration upon
personal knowledge and, if called upon as a witness, would testify competently as to the matters
recited herein.
2.
Attached hereto as Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of the document produced by
Plaintiff under Bates range IPEL0001270-1273.
3.
Attached hereto as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the document produced by
Plaintiff under Bates range IPEL0001395-1399.
01980.51928/4636514.1
4.
Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of the document produced by
Plaintiff under Bates range IPEL0001557-1567.
5.
Attached hereto as Exhibit 0 is a true and correct copy of an email from Plaintiff's
counsel Charles Monterio to defense counsel, dated March 1, 2012.
6.
Attached hereto as Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of the document produced by
Plaintiff's counsel on behalf of named inventor Andrew "Ken" Lang under Bates range
LANG0007021-7028.
7.
Attached hereto as Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of letter from Google's counsel
David Perlson to Plaintiff's counsel Ken Brothers, dated January 5, 2012.
8.
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Dated: March 5, 2012
Margaret P. Kammerud
01980.51928/4636514.1
DATED: March 5, 2012
/s/ Stephen E. Noona
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624.3000
Facsimile: (757) 624.3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
David Bilsker
David A. Perlson
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 875-6600
Facsimile: (415) 875-6700
davidbilsker@quinnemanuel.com
davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com
Attorneys for Google Inc.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 5, 2012, I will electronically file the foregoing with the Clerk
of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the
following:
Jeffrey K. Sherwood
Kenneth W. Brothers
DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
1825 Eye Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 420-2200
Facsimile: (202) 420-2201
sherwoodj@dicksteinshapiro.com
brothersk@dicksteinshapiro.com
Donald C. Schultz
W. Ryan Snow
Steven Stancliff
CRENSHAW, WARE & MARTIN, P.L.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 1500
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 623-3000
Facsimile: (757) 623-5735
dschultz@cwm-law.cm
wrsnow@cwm-law.com
sstancliff@cwm-law.com
Counsel for Plaintiff, I/P Engine, Inc.
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624-3000
Facsimile: (757) 624-3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
Counsel for Google Inc.,
Target Corporation,
IAC Search & Media, Inc., and
Gannet Co., Inc.
2
/s/ Stephen E. Noona
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624.3000
Facsimile: (757) 624.3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
11464104_1.DOC
3
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?