Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 17019
`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 17019
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 17020
`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 17020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REDACTED
`
`REDACTED
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 17021
`
`Exhibit 2
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 17022
`
`From:
`Sent:
`To:
`
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`
`davish@gtlaw.com
`Friday, May 1, 2020 2:41 PM
`Nosson Knobloch; Matthew Ford; Kat Hacker; Mailing List - Leedy; bfarnan@farnanlaw.com;
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`ELM3DS-MICRON-OMM@omm.com; ElmMicron-RLF@rlf.com; apoff@ycst.com; pkraman@ycst.com;
`ServicePHSamsung-ELM3DS@paulhastings.com; narayenv@gtlaw.com; schladweilerb@gtlaw.com;
`anandpatel@paulhastings.com
`RE: Elm Litigation - Expedited Indefiniteness Schedule Proposal per Meet and Confer
`
`My proposal is that the parties would have a dispositive motion on indefiniteness of the stress terms per the
`proposed schedule, and then a second, regularly scheduled motion on other issues if needed. As for page
`limits, we can discuss those if this proposal is something you all are willing to accept.
`
`Harold Davis
`Shareholder
`
`Greenberg Traurig, LLP
`4 Embarcadero Ctr, Ste. 3000 | San Francisco, CA 94111-5983
`T +1 415.590.5100 Mobile +1.415.906.9922
`davish@gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com
`
`From: Nosson Knobloch <nosson.knobloch@bartlitbeck.com>
`Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 4:40 PM
`To: Davis, Hal (Shld-SFO-IP-Tech) <davish@gtlaw.com>; Matthew Ford <matthew.ford@bartlitbeck.com>; Kat Hacker
`<kat.hacker@bartlitbeck.com>; Mailing List - Leedy <leedy@bartlit-beck.com>; bfarnan@farnanlaw.com;
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`Cc: ELM3DS-MICRON-OMM@omm.com; ElmMicron-RLF@rlf.com; apoff@ycst.com; pkraman@ycst.com;
`ServicePHSamsung-ELM3DS@paulhastings.com; Narayen, Vishesh (OfCnl-TPA-IP-Tech) <narayenv@gtlaw.com>;
`Schladweiler, Benjamin (Shld-DEL-IP-Tech) <schladweilerb@gtlaw.com>; anandpatel@paulhastings.com
`Subject: RE: Elm Litigation - Expedited Indefiniteness Schedule Proposal per Meet and Confer
`
`*EXTERNAL TO GT*
`
`Hal,
`
`I want to be sure I understand your proposal. Under the current scheduling order,
`there is one opportunity to file dispositive motions. Is your suggestion that we agree to
`expedite discovery on the issue of stress and agree that Defendants can file their one
`dispositive motion earlier than currently allowed? Or is your suggestion that we agree
`to expedite discovery on this issue and agree that Defendants will be permitted two
`rounds of dispositive motions (i.e., an expedited motion on stress, and then a regularly-
`scheduled motion on other issues)? If the latter, how would this impact the total page
`limits currently allowed for dispositive motions?
`
`Thanks,
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 17023
`
`
`
`-Nosson
`
`BartlitBeck LLP
`
`
`Nosson D. Knobloch | p: 303.592.3122 | c: 773.301.2851 | Nosson.Knobloch@BartlitBeck.com | 1801 Wewatta Street, 12th Floor, Denver, CO
`80202
`This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If it has been sent to you in error, please reply to advise the sender of the error and then immediately delete this
`message.
`
`From: davish@gtlaw.com <davish@gtlaw.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 12:55 PM
`To: Nosson Knobloch <nosson.knobloch@bartlitbeck.com>; Matthew Ford <matthew.ford@bartlitbeck.com>; Kat
`Hacker <kat.hacker@bartlitbeck.com>; Mailing List - Leedy <leedy@bartlit-beck.com>; bfarnan@farnanlaw.com;
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`Cc: ELM3DS-MICRON-OMM@omm.com; ElmMicron-RLF@rlf.com; apoff@ycst.com; pkraman@ycst.com;
`ServicePHSamsung-ELM3DS@paulhastings.com; narayenv@gtlaw.com; schladweilerb@gtlaw.com;
`anandpatel@paulhastings.com
`Subject: Elm Litigation - Expedited Indefiniteness Schedule Proposal per Meet and Confer
`
`Nosson:
`
`Thank you for talking with us on Monday about Defendants’ proposal to expedite the issue of
`indefiniteness of the low stress terms.
`
`Here is a more concrete proposal for you and your client to consider:
`
`
`Joint Proposed Expedited Schedule for Indefiniteness of “Low Stress” terms
`
`Event
`Deadline for fact discovery on “low stress” indefiniteness
`Opening expert reports on “low stress” indefiniteness
`Responsive expert reports on “low stress” indefiniteness
`Deadline for Expert discovery on “low stress” indefiniteness
`Case dispositive motion on indefiniteness on “low stress” terms
`Response to motion
`Reply in support of motion
`Hearing, subject to Court availability
`
`I can appreciate your initial hesitancy, but as I mentioned, we believe this proposal benefits all
`sides in getting a resolution on these issues at least 7-8 months earlier than anticipated under the
`current schedule.
`
`For one, it would mean that we would only have to do our expert reports / discovery only
`once. As it stands now, all the experts will have to take various, alternative positions on the
`terms and guess as to what the Court’s construction may be should the Court decide that the
`terms are not indefinite. Dkt. 258 at pp. 16-17 (ruling that the low stress term “is not ‘plain and
`ordinary’ meaning”). Although we do not have a trial date yet, this would likely occur fairly
`
`Deadline
`July 17, 2020
`August 7, 2020
`August 28, 2020
`September 18, 2020
`October 2, 2020
`October 16, 2020
`October 23, 2020
`TBD (November 6, 2020)
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-01432-LPS Document 281-1 Filed 06/12/20 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 17024
`close to trial and cause a lot of unnecessary expense and scrambling by the parties to issue
`supplemental reports and complete depositions on the supplemental reports. It may even
`necessitate moving the trial back further to accommodate a Court construction.
`
`Second, clarification on this issue is likely to increase the chances that this case reaches an out-
`of-court resolution sooner. I don’t believe any party is going to seriously entertain settlement at
`this stage of the case absent a court ruling on the indefiniteness issues. We believe the above
`schedule saves the parties resources and makes a quicker settlement more likely should we
`receive a decision by the court.
`
`Could you please let us know this week your position on this proposal?
`
`
`Harold Davis
`Shareholder
`
`Greenberg Traurig, LLP
`4 Embarcadero Ctr, Ste. 3000 | San Francisco, CA 94111-5983
`T +1 415.590.5100 Mobile +1.415.906.9922
`davish@gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com
`
`
`
`
`If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us
`immediately at postmaster@gtlaw.com, and do not use or disseminate the information.
`
`3
`
`