Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 208

DECLARATION of Davina Inslee filed by Plaintiff Interval Licensing LLC re #198 Joint MOTION to Stay by all Defendants filed (Sargent, Edgar)

Download PDF
Interval Licensing LLC v. eBay, Inc. et al Doc. 208 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Declaration of Davina Inslee Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP Hon. Marsha J. Pechman UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE INTERVAL LICENSING LLC, Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP Plaintiff, v. AOL, INC.; APPLE, INC.; eBAY, INC.; FACEBOOK, INC.; GOOGLE INC.; NETFLIX, INC.; OFFICE DEPOT, INC.; OFFICEMAX INC.; STAPLES, INC.; YAHOO! INC.; AND YOUTUBE, LLC, Defendants. DECLARATION OF DAVINA INSLEE JURY DEMAND I, Davina Inslee, am over the age of 18, have personal knowledge of all the facts stated herein and declare as follows: 1. I am IP Counsel at Vulcan Inc. I submit this declaration in support of Interval Licensing's Opposition to Defendants' Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Reexaminations. 2. Vulcan Inc. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Washington, with its principal place of business at 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suit 900, Seattle, WA 98104. 3. Vulcan Inc. was founded by Paul G. Allen, with Jo Lynn Allen, in 1986, to manage his business and charitable endeavors. Its endeavors are farranging and include the creation of innovative technologies. Susman Godfrey, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle WA 98101-3000 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. companies. 5. For example, Vulcan Capital, an investment arm of Vulcan Inc., has made various investments in dozens of technology companies, including internet Plaintiff Interval Licensing LLC ("Interval") is a limited liability company duly organized under the laws of the state of Washington, with its principal place of business at 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suit 900, Seattle, WA 98104. 6. 7. 8. Interval is a sister company of Vulcan Inc. All of its officers are Interval owns a large portfolio of intellectual property developed by Interval Research was founded in 1992 by Paul Allen and David employees of Vulcan Inc. Interval Research Corporation ("Interval Research"). Liddle to perform advanced research and development in the areas of information systems, communications, and computer science, and commercialize these inventions. 9. Interval Research evolved into a preeminent technology innovation firm, which, at one point, employed over 110 of the world's leading scientist, physicists, engineers, artists, and journalists. 10. Interval Research developed a large number of technological innovations. After only a decade of its existence, Interval Research had three hundred issued and pending patents. 11. it dissolved. 12. Interval Research's large and diverse intellectual property portfolio is now owned by Interval. The portfolio included over three hundred patents and pending applications. Four of these patents are Patents-in-Suit. 2 Declaration of Davina Inslee Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP 1507241v1/011873 Susman Godfrey, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle WA 98101-3000 Despite its accomplishments, Interval Research did not succeed commercially. In 2000, Interval Research laid off the bulk of its staff, and in 2004, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 13. I became IP Counsel at Vulcan, Inc. in December 2005. My responsibilities include overseeing the protection, monetization and enforcement of intellectual property owned by Interval and Vulcan. 14. Since December 2005, I have been involved in due diligence related to Interval's intellectual property as well as those in other related companies, including the prosecution and analysis of the portfolio. During 2006 and 2007, Interval negotiated for the sale of several different groups of its patents, which took substantial additional time and effort. 15. In early 2008, I began due diligence on the four patents-in-suit. This due diligence included careful analysis of the patents and identification and retention of consultancies to assist in evaluating the patents. This due diligence included not only the patents-in-suit, but also involved analyzing the other patents within the Interval portfolio as well as those in other portfolios where Vulcan had an interest. 16. After completing the time-consuming due diligence process, which took nearly two years, Vulcan decided to try to license and enforce the patents-insuit. Before filing suit, we contacted the Defendants to determine whether they had any interest in a license without having to file suit. Those negotiations led After nowhere, and most of the Defendants did not respond to our inquiry. contacting the Defendants led nowhere, we filed suit in August 2010. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED at Seattle, Washington this __th day of March, 2011. Davina Inslee 3 Declaration of Davina Inslee Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP 1507241v1/011873 Susman Godfrey, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle WA 98101-3000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 28, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following counsel of record: Attorneys for AOL, Inc. Aneelah Afzali Cortney Alexander Robert Burns Elliot Cook Gerald Ivey Scott Johnson Shannon Jost Attorneys for Apple, Inc. David Almeling Brian Berliner George Riley Jeremy Roller Scott Wilsdon Neil Yang aneelah.afzali@stokeslaw.com cortney.alexander@finnegan.com robert.burns@finnegan.com elliot.cook@finnegan.com gerald.ivey@finnegan.com scott.johnson@stokeslaw.com shannon.jost@stokeslaw.com dalmeling@omm.com bberliner@omm.com griley@omm.com jroller@yarmuth.com wilsdon@yarmuth.com nyang@omm.com Attorneys for eBay, Inc., Netflix, Inc., and Staples, Inc. Chris Carraway chris.carraway@klarquist.com Kristin Cleveland Kristin.cleveland@klarquist.com Klaus Hamm Klaus.hamm@klarquist.com Arthur Harrigan, Jr. arthurh@dhlt.com John Vandenberg john.vandenberg@klarquist.com Christopher Wion chrisw@dhlt.com Attorneys for Facebook, Inc. Christen Dubois Heidi Keefe Michael Rhodes Elizabeth Stameshkin Mark Weinstein cdubois@cooley.com hkeefe@cooley.com mrhodes@cooley.com lstameshkin@cooley.com mweinstein@cooley.com Attorneys for Google, Inc. and YouTube, LLC Aneelah Afzali aneelah.afzali@stokeslaw.com Aaron Chase achase@whitecase.com Dimitrios Drivas ddrivas@whitecase.com John Handy jhandy@whitecase.com Warren Heit wheit@whitecase.com Scott Johnson scott.johnson@stokeslaw.com Shannon Jost shannon.jost@stokeslaw.com Declaration of Davina Inslee Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP Susman Godfrey, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle WA 98101-3000 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kevin McGann Wendi Schepler Attorneys for Office Depot, Inc. Chris Carraway Kristin Cleveland Klaus Hamm Arthur Harrigan, Jr. John Vandenberg Christopher Wion Attorneys for OfficeMax, Inc. Kevin Baumgardner Steven Fogg John Letchinger Douglas Rupert Attorneys for Yahoo! Inc. Francis Ho Richard S.J. Hung Michael Jacobs Matthew Kreeger Dario Machleidt Eric Ow Mark Walters kmcgann@whitecase.com wschepler@whitecase.com chris.carraway@klarquist.com Kristin.cleveland@klarquist.com Klaus.hamm@klarquist.com arthurh@dhlt.com john.vandenberg@klarquist.com chrisw@dhlt.com kbaumgardner@corrcronin.com sfogg@corrcronin.com letchinger@wildman.com rupert@wildman.com fho@mofo.com rhung@mofo.com mjacobs@mofo.com mkreeger@mofo.com dmachleidt@flhlaw.com eow@mofo.com mwalters@flhlaw.com /s/ Edgar Sargent Edgar Sargent 4 Declaration of Edgar Sargent Case No. 2:10-cv-01385-MJP 1507241v1/011873 Susman Godfrey, LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle WA 98101-3000

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?