`
`Exhibit 1
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 30 PageID #: 27933
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 30 PagelD #: 27933
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE
`DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ELM 3DS INNOVATIONS, LLC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`ve
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICSCO., LTD., ET AL,
`
`Defendant.
`
`NewtNee?NeNaeNaeNeeNeNeNe
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-CV-1430-LPS-JLH
`
`SUSAN R. BROWN’S_ AMENDED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO SUBPOENA FOR
`DOCUMENTS FROM DISSOLUTION OF
`GE CASE AND SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION
`UNILATERALLY SCHEDULED BY SAMSUNG ELECTRONICSCO., LTD.
`
`SUSAN R. BROWN,in properperson, hereby files this, her Amended Motion for Protective Orderas to
`
`Subpoena for Documents from Dissolution ofMarriage Case and Subpoenafor Deposition Unilaterally Scheduled
`
`by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and alleges as follows:
`
`Background
`
`1.
`
`Counselfor the Defendant, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., ET AL (hereinafter referred
`
`to as “Defendant”), has issued a Subpoena to Produce Documents andfor Testimony ofthe undersigned. This
`
`Subpoena was served in Florida and emanates from a casethatis pending in Delaware District court. Defendant,
`
`Samsung’s, counsel appear to be located in California.
`
`2.
`
`The undersignedis a marital and family lawyer in the state ofFlorida. While the undersignedis
`
`admitted to Florida’s Southern District Federal Court, the undersigned is not admitted to the Federal Court in
`
`Delaware, where this Motion is being filed. Accordingly, the undersigned is filing this Motion as a pro se
`individual, as opposed to an attomey.
`
`3.
`
`The undersigned represented Julia Leedy, who appears not to be a party to this action, in a
`
`dissolution ofmarriage case in Broward County, Florida in 2012.
`
`The undersigned was served with a Subpoena for Deposition and records seeking documents and
`4.
`information regarding patent valuationsrelating to Julia and Glenn Leedy’s dissolution ofmarriage case that was
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 3 of 30 PageID #: 27934
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 3 of 30 PagelD #: 27934
`
`filed in 2011 andsettled via Marital Settlement Agreementover nine years ago. The dissolution ofmarriage case
`ended with the January 7, 2013 Final JudgmentofDissolution ofMarriage.
`
`5.
`
`The undersigned communicated with Mrs. Leedy immediately prior to filing this response. Mrs.
`
`Leedy advised the undersigned that she objects to production ofher dissolution ofmarriage records (that are not
`
`otherwise in the public record). Because Mrs. Leedy is not a party to this action, this Objection is Mrs. Leedy’s
`only vehicle to object to her private information regarding a divorce case that was filed over ten years ago being
`provided to counsel for Samsung. The undersigned has already advised counsel for Samsungthat she does not
`have any patent valuations or records that actually value the patents owned by Plaintiff. Plaintiff was Mr. and
`
`Mrs. Leedy’s family business which Mr. Leedy was left in controlofafterthe dissolution ofmarriage.
`
`Objection to Documents Requested
`
`6.
`The Subpoena onthe undersigned is directed to the issue ofvaluation of patents in Mr. and Mrs.
`Leedy’s dissolution of marriage case. As reflected by the Marital Settlement Agreement, which counsel for
`Samsungclearly has a copyof, the patents in question were never valued becauseofthe impossibility ofvaluing
`groupsof“unsold”patents that include both patents created during the parties’ marriage andpatents created after
`the cutoff date for defining assets as marital (which is the date of filing a dissolution of marriage action). As
`reflected in the Marital Settlement Agreement that Mr. and Mrs. Leedy entered into, the parties thereto agreed that
`Mr. Leedy would need to perform “non-marital” work and spend “non-marital” moneyin orderto sell the patents.
`The valuation issue in the dissolution of marriage case was settled by the agreement for the implementation of
`different formulas that would control the marital portion of various patent groups. Because ofthe agreement to
`use these formulas, no documents exist that would show the value of any patent or patent group.
`
`7.
`
`In addition, the dissolution of marriage case was settled over nine years ago, and any valuation
`
`agreed to in 2012 would not be determinative ofthe valuesofthe patents in 2022.
`
`Besides the Marital Settlement Agreement, the only documentthat the undersigned foundin the
`8.
`file available to her (whichis a digital file) that addressed the valuation issue, is the transcript ofthe Wife’s
`deposition. The Broward County court docketreflects that the Wife’s deposition was neverfiled. Any
`testimony ofthe Wife in her unfiled deposition was clearly notrelied on in the Marital Settlement Agreement
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 30 PageID #: 27935
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 30 PagelD #: 27935
`
`that included formulas for valuation ofthe different patent groups. From the face ofthe Marital Settlement
`
`Agreement, it is clear that the settlement for equitable distribution ofPlaintiffElm 3DS Innovations was based
`
`on several formulas that used “coverture fractions.” The valuation was clearly not based on Mrs. Leedy’s
`
`personalopinionofthe patents that Plaintiff owned. '
`
`Rule 502 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure defines the work productprivilege as tangible
`9.
`material (orits intangible equivalent) prepared in anticipation of litigation orfortrial.
`
`10.
`
`The Wife’s unfiled deposition appears to fall under this definition since it was tangible material
`
`prepared in anticipationoflitigation andtrial.
`
`Because of the attorney-client privilege, the undersigned objects to providing a copy of the
`11.
`deposition transcript, which appears to fall under the definition ofwork product.
`
`The undersigned is required to err on the side of caution and object to providing possibly
`12,
`privileged documents. This Court should determine whether the work product privilege applies prior to requiring
`the production ofthe unfiled unused deposition transcript.
`
`The undersigned has communicated with Mrs. Leedy, who objects to personal information from
`13.
`her dissolution of marriage case (that involves other issues besides the patents) dating back to 2011 and 2012
`being provided to an entity involvedinlitigation involving her late Husband’sbusiness.
`
`Subpoenafor the Undersigned’s Testimony via Deposition
`
`The February 15, 2022 deposition was not coordinated and was unilaterally scheduled by
`
`14.
`Defendant.
`
`15.
`
`There is no location for the deposition. There is no Zoom link provided.
`
`The Federal Rules provide limitations on the locations of witness depositions. Certainly, the
`16.
`undersigned is not required to travel to submit to a deposition. If a deposition occurs, the undersigned requests
`thatit be taken by Zoom on a date that is coordinated in advance.
`
`
`' The referenceto attached pages ofMrs. Leedy’s deposition has been deleted. Its inclusion was an error that was based on
`the erroneous use ofan earlier draft ofthis motion. (prepared priorto the undersigned communicating with Mrs. Leedy).
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 5 of 30 PageID #: 27936
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 5 of 30 PagelD #: 27936
`
`17,
`
`While the undersigned does notrecall much detail from a case almost ten years ago, the discovery
`
`requested by Defendant places the undersigned in a position where sheis being asked to disclose potentially
`
`confidential settlement negotiations in a case. The Marital Settlement Agreement speaksfor itself as to the lack
`
`of a specific valuation ofpatents.
`
`Relief Sought
`
`18.
`
`For the reasons stated above, this Honorable Court should enter an OrderofProtection relative to
`
`the taking of the deposition of Susan R. Brown on February 15, 2022 and production of the unfiled deposition
`
`transcript.
`
`19.
`
`This court should also enter an Order of Protection as to production of Mrs. Leedy’s unfiled
`
`deposition transcript.
`
`20.
`
`The Defendanthas improperly scheduled the deposition ofthe undersigned, and the Court should
`
`award the undersigned attorney’s fees.
`
`WHEREFORE, SUSAN R. BROWN respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter an Order of
`
`Protection relative to the Defendant’s request to take her deposition on February 15, 2022, production of the
`
`unfiled deposition transcript, award attomey’s fees andcosts relative to the prosecution of this Motion, as well as
`
`grant such other and furtherrelief as this Court deemsjust and proper underthe circumstances.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I HEREBY CERTIFYthata true and correct copy ofthe foregoing was servedtoall interested parties on
`the attached service listontif
`day ofFebruary, 2022.
`
`SUSAN R. BROWN,P.A.
`8211 W. Broward Blvd., PH-4
`Plantation, Florida 33324
`Susan@susanbrownpa.com
`Staff@susanbrownpa.com_~
`
`(954) 474-9500
`
`SUSAN R. BROWN
`Florida Bar No. 440795
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 6 of 30 PageID #: 27937
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 6 of 30 PagelD #: 27937
`1
`
`Adam W.Poff
`.
`Pilar G. Kraman
`YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT &
`TAYLOR, LLP
`Rodney Square
`1000 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`apoff@ycst.com
`pkraman@ycst.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Samsung Electronics
`Co., Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc.,
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and
`Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC
`
`Counsel
`
`for Samsung
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Allan M. Soobert
`Naveen Modi
`Phillip W. Citroen
`Koichiro Kidokoro
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`875 15th street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`
`allansoobert@paulhastings.com
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`phillipcitroen@paulhastings.com
`koichirokidokoro@paulhastings.co
`
`m Y
`
`ar R. Chaikovsky
`Philip Ou
`Joseph J. Rumpler,[1
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`1 1 17 California Avenue
`94304
`Palo
`Alto,
`CA
`yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`philipou@paulhastings.com
`josephrumpler@paulhastings.com
`
`Elizabeth L. Brann
`PAUL HASTINGSLLP
`4747 Executive Drive, 12th Floor
`
`San_Diego, CA 92121
`
`elizabethbrann@paulhastings.com
`
`Soyoung Jung
`PAUL HASTINGSLLP 515 S.
`Flower Street, 25th Floor
`90071
`Los
`Angeles,
`CA
`soyoungjung@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 7 of 30 PageID #: 27938
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 7 of 30 PagelD #: 27938
`
`Counsel for Elm 3DS
`
`Brian E. Farnan
`Farnan LLP
`919 N. Market St., 12" Floor
`Wilmingon, DE 19801
`bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.
`Farnan LLP
`919 N. Market St., 12" Floor
`Wilmingon, DE 19801
`farnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`Michael J. Farnan
`Farnan LLP
`919 N. Market St., 12" Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`Matthew R. Ford
`Matthew.ford@bartlit-beck.com
`
`Katherine L.I. Hacker
`Kat.hacker@bartlitbeck.com
`
`John M. Hughes
`John.hughes@bartlitbeck.com
`
`Nosson D. Knobloch
`Nosson.knobloch@bartlit-beck.com
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 8 of 30 PageID #: 27939
`
`Exhibit 2
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 9 of 30 PageID #: 27940
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 4 of 23 PageID #: 27014
`
`AO 88B (Rev. 02/14) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`for the
` District of Delaware
`__________ District of __________
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`14-cv-1430-LPS-JLH
`
`))))))
`
`Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC
`Plaintiff
`v.
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.
`Defendant
`
`To:
`
`SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS
`OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION
`Susan R. Brown
`8211 W Broward Blvd. PH #4, Plantation, FL 33324
`(Name of person to whom this subpoena is directed)
`✔
`(cid:117) Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following
`documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and to permit inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the
`material:
`
`See Attachment A.
`
`Place:
`
`Electronically to yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`Or to physical location TBD
`
`Date and Time:
`
`02/01/2022 9:00 am
`
`(cid:117) Inspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or
`other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party
`may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it.
`
`Place:
`
`Date and Time:
`
`The following provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 are attached – Rule 45(c), relating to the place of compliance;
`Rule 45(d), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena; and Rule 45(e) and (g), relating to your duty to
`respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so.
`01/10/2022
`Date:
`
`CLERK OF COURT
`
`Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
`
`OR
`
`/s/ Yar R. Chaikovsky
`Attorney’s signature
`
`The name, address, e-mail address, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of party)
`, who issues or requests this subpoena, are:
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.
`Yar R. Chaikovsky, 1117 California Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304, yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com, (650) 320-1800
`Notice to the person who issues or requests this subpoena
`If this subpoena commands the production of documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things or the
`inspection of premises before trial, a notice and a copy of the subpoena must be served on each party in this case before
`it is served on the person to whom it is directed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(4).
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 10 of 30 PageID #: 27941
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 5 of 23 PageID #: 27015
`
`AO 88B (Rev. 02/14) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action (Page 2)
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`14-cv-1430-LPS-JLH
`
`PROOF OF SERVICE
`(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.)
`
`I received this subpoena for (name of individual and title, if any)
`.
`
`on (date)
`
`(cid:117) I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows:
`
`(cid:117) I returned the subpoena unexecuted because:
`
`on (date)
`
`; or
`
`Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also
`tendered to the witness the fees for one day’s attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of
`$
`.
`
`My fees are $
`
`for travel and $
`
`for services, for a total of $
`
`0.00
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
`
`Date:
`
`Additional information regarding attempted service, etc.:
`
`Server’s signature
`
`Printed name and title
`
`Server’s address
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 11 of 30 PageID #: 27942
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 6 of 23 PageID #: 27016
`
`AO 88B (Rev. 02/14) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action(Page 3)
`
`(c) Place of Compliance.
`
`Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), (e), and (g) (Effective 12/1/13)
`(ii) disclosing an unretained expert’s opinion or information that does
`not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert’s
`study that was not requested by a party.
`(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances
`described in Rule 45(d)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or
`modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified
`conditions if the serving party:
`(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be
`otherwise met without undue hardship; and
`(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated.
`
` (1) For a Trial, Hearing, or Deposition. A subpoena may command a
`person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition only as follows:
` (A) within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or
`regularly transacts business in person; or
` (B) within the state where the person resides, is employed, or regularly
`transacts business in person, if the person
` (i) is a party or a party’s officer; or
` (ii) is commanded to attend a trial and would not incur substantial
`expense.
`
` (2) For Other Discovery. A subpoena may command:
` (A) production of documents, electronically stored information, or
`tangible things at a place within 100 miles of where the person resides, is
`employed, or regularly transacts business in person; and
` (B) inspection of premises at the premises to be inspected.
`
`(d) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena; Enforcement.
`
` (1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions. A party or attorney
`responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps
`to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the
`subpoena. The court for the district where compliance is required must
`enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction—which may include
`lost earnings and reasonable attorney’s fees—on a party or attorney who
`fails to comply.
`
` (2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.
`(A) Appearance Not Required. A person commanded to produce
`documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to
`permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of
`production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition,
`hearing, or trial.
`(B) Objections. A person commanded to produce documents or tangible
`things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated
`in the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing, or
`sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises—or to
`producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested.
`The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for
`compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made,
`the following rules apply:
`(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party
`may move the court for the district where compliance is required for an
`order compelling production or inspection.
` (ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the
`order must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party’s officer from
`significant expense resulting from compliance.
`
` (3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.
`(A) When Required. On timely motion, the court for the district where
`compliance is required must quash or modify a subpoena that:
` (i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply;
`(ii) requires a person to comply beyond the geographical limits
`specified in Rule 45(c);
`(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no
`exception or waiver applies; or
`(iv) subjects a person to undue burden.
`(B) When Permitted. To protect a person subject to or affected by a
`subpoena, the court for the district where compliance is required may, on
`motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires:
`(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research,
`development, or commercial information; or
`
`(e) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.
`
` (1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. These
`procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored
`information:
`(A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents
`must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or
`must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand.
`(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified.
`If a subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored
`information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in
`which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms.
`(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form. The
`person responding need not produce the same electronically stored
`information in more than one form.
`(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information. The person
`responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information
`from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because
`of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective
`order, the person responding must show that the information is not
`reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is
`made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the
`requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule
`26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.
`
`(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.
`(A) Information Withheld. A person withholding subpoenaed information
`under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation
`material must:
`(i) expressly make the claim; and
`(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or
`tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself
`privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim.
`(B) Information Produced. If information produced in response to a
`subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as
`trial-preparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party
`that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being
`notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified
`information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information
`until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the
`information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly
`present the information under seal to the court for the district where
`compliance is required for a determination of the claim. The person who
`produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is
`resolved.
`
`(g) Contempt.
`The court for the district where compliance is required—and also, after a
`motion is transferred, the issuing court—may hold in contempt a person
`who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the
`subpoena or an order related to it.
`
`For access to subpoena materials, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a) Committee Note (2013).
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 12 of 30 PageID #: 27943
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 7 of 23 PageID #: 27017
`
`ATTACHMENT A
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`The following definitions are applicable to terms employed in this Notice:
`
`1.
`
`“Leedy Divorce Proceeding” refers to In re: The Marriage of Julia A. Leedy and
`
`Glenn J. Leedy, No. 11-007902 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct.).
`
`2.
`
`“Patents-at-Issue” shall mean United States Patent Nos. 7,193,239; 7,474,004;
`
`7,504,732; 8,035,233; 8,410,617; 8,629,542; 8,653,672; 8,791,581; 8,796,862; 8,841,778;
`
`8,907,499; 8,928,119; and 8,933,570.
`
`3.
`
`“Related Patents” shall include, whether or not abandoned and whether or not
`
`issued, (a) any patent or patent application that claims priority to the Patents- at-Issue, (b) any
`
`patent or patent application that claims priority from any patent or patent application to which
`
`the Patents-at-Issue claims priority, (c) any patent or patent application on which the Patents-at-
`
`Issue depends for priority, (d) any patent or patent application identified in the Related U.S.
`
`Application Data for the Patents-at-Issue, (e) any patent or patent application that claims priority
`
`from any patent or patent application identified in the Related U.S. Application Data for any of
`
`the Patents-at-Issue, (f) any reissue or reexamination of any of the aforementioned patents or
`
`patent applications, and (g) any foreign counterpart patent or foreign counterpart application of
`
`any of the aforementioned patents or patent applications (a foreign counterpart patent and
`
`foreign counterpart application shall include any foreign patent or foreign patent application in
`
`which a claim for priority has been made in either a U.S. application or a foreign application
`
`based on the other, or that the disclosures of the U.S. and foreign patent applications are
`
`substantively identical).
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 13 of 30 PageID #: 27944
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 8 of 23 PageID #: 27018
`
`4.
`
` “You” shall mean Susan R. Brown and any person or entity acting or purporting
`
`to act on your behalf.
`
`5.
`
`“Patent Infringement Litigation” refers to Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC v. Samsung
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., No. 1:14-cv-01430-LPS (D. Del.).
`
`6.
`
`The term “Samsung” refers to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung
`
`Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Austin Semiconductor,
`
`LLC and their officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, attorneys, affiliates,
`
`successors, and assigns, and to persons and entities acting or purporting, to act on behalf of
`
`Samsung.
`
`7.
`
`The term “Elm” refers to Elm Technology Corporation and its employees, agents,
`
`representatives, attorneys, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and assigns, and to persons and
`
`entities acting or purporting to act on behalf of Elm Technology Corporation, including, but not
`
`limited to Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC and Glenn J. Leedy.
`
`8.
`
`The term “person,” unless otherwise specified, means any natural person, firm,
`
`partnership, association, corporation, business, proprietorship, government or quasi-
`
`governmental body, agency or commission, or any other organization or entity.
`
`9.
`
`The term “document” and its plural shall refer to anything that would be a
`
`“writing” or “recording” as defined in Rule 1001 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, or a
`
`“document,” as defined in Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and refers to all
`
`handwritten, typed, printed, electronic, or otherwise visually or aurally reproduced materials,
`
`and all originals and copies that contain any notes, handwriting, underscoring, deletions, or that
`
`in any way otherwise differ from the original thereof. Such documents include but are not limited
`
`to: (1) all the written, printed, recorded, graphic, or sound reproductions, however produced,
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 14 of 30 PageID #: 27945
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 9 of 23 PageID #: 27019
`
`including but not limited to correspondence, memoranda, notes, telegrams, notebooks, diaries,
`
`desk calendars, charts, photographs, and records of any kind; (2) all computer-readable data
`
`compilations, including but not limited to tapes, diskettes, card, cassettes; electronic mail, and
`
`all other electronic or mechanical devices which contain information stored in mainframe and
`
`personal computers or devices (such as PDAs/cell phones) or accessible “online”; (3) all
`
`originals, drafts, and copies that differ in any respect from the original, all marginal comments
`
`that appear on such documents, all transcripts or recordings of such documents, and all
`
`attachments, enclosures, or documents affixed or referred to in such documents.
`
`10.
`
`The terms “relating,” “related,” or “relates” shall mean concerning, referring,
`
`describing, evidencing, or constituting the referenced subject matter, to the extent that such
`
`material is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`11.
`
`The words “and,” “or,” and “and/or” shall be construed conjunctively or
`
`disjunctively, whichever maximizes the scope of each discovery request in which they are used.
`
`INSTRUCTIONS
`
`1.
`
`You are to search all documents within your possession, custody, or control,
`
`wherever located, including but not limited to any documents placed in storage facilities or in
`
`the possession of any employee, agent, representative, attorney, investigator, or other person
`
`acting or purporting to act on your behalf, in order to fully respond to the requests herein.
`
`2.
`
`If you do not produce each document or thing requested herein as they are kept
`
`in the usual course of business, you must organize and label the documents or things produced
`
`to correspond with the particular document request to which the document or thing is responsive.
`
`3.
`
`You are to produce all documents that are responsive in whole or in part to any
`
`of the requests herein in full, without abridgement or abbreviation. If any such documents cannot
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 15 of 30 PageID #: 27946
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 10 of 23 PageID #: 27020
`
`be produced in full, produce the document to the extent possible and indicate in your written
`
`response what portion of the document is not produced and why it could not be produced.
`
`4.
`
`If any of the documents requested herein are no longer in your possession,
`
`custody or control, you are requested to identify each such requested document by date, type of
`
`document, person(s) from whom sent, person(s) to whom sent, and person(s) receiving copies,
`
`and to provide a summary of its pertinent contents.
`
`5.
`
`If any document responsive to these requests has been destroyed, describe the
`
`content of such document, the location of any copies of such document, the date of such
`
`destruction and the name of the person who ordered or authorized such destruction.
`
`6.
`
`If the production of any documents responsive to these requests is objected to on
`
`the ground of privilege or work product, or for any other reason, with respect to each such
`
`document state:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`the date appearing on such document, or if no date appears, the date on
`
`which such document was prepared;
`
`the name of each person to whom such document was addressed;
`
`the name of each person, other than the addressee(s) identified in
`
`subparagraph (b) above, to whom such document or copy thereof as sent,
`
`or with whom such document was discussed;
`
`the name of each person who signed such document or, if not signed, the
`
`name of each person who prepared it;
`
`the name of each person making any contribution to the authorship of
`
`such document;
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 16 of 30 PageID #: 27947
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 11 of 23 PageID #: 27021
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`the job title or position of each person identified in subparagraph (b), (c),
`
`(d) and (e) above;
`
`the date such document was received or discussed by each person
`
`identified in subparagraphs (b) or (c) above;
`
`the general nature or description of such document and its number of
`
`pages; and
`
`the specific ground(s) upon which the privilege or work product rests.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 17 of 30 PageID #: 27948
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 454 Filed 01/10/22 Page 12 of 23 PageID #: 27022
`
`
`DOCUMENTS TO BE PROVIDED PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 45
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
`
`All expert reports or other expert disclosures, whether draft or final, from the Leedy
`
`Divorce Proceeding valuing one or more of the Patents-at-Issue and/or any Related Patents,
`
`including, but not limited to, any expert reports or other expert disclosures from Lew Zaretzki,
`
`Scott DeMarco, or David Wanetick.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
`
`All deposition transcripts from the Leedy Divorce Proceeding for Lew Zaretzki, Scott
`
`DeMarco, David Wanetick, or any other person involved in valuing one or more of the Patents-
`
`at-Issue and/or any Related Patents.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
`
`All documents from the Leedy Divorce Proceeding valuing one or more of the Patents-at-
`
`Issue and/or any Related Patents.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4:
`
`All communications from the Leedy Divorce Proceeding regarding the value of one or
`
`more of the Patents-at-Issue and/or any Related Patents.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5:
`
`All documents from the Leedy Divorce Proceeding valuing Elm.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6:
`
`All communications from the Leedy Divorce Proceeding regarding the value of Elm.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7:
`
`All documents valuing one or more of the Patents-at-Issue and/or any Related Patents,
`
`including any drafts thereof.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Document 480-1 Filed 02/24/22 Page 18 of 30 PageID #: 27949
`Case 1:14-cv-01430-LPS Docum