Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 49480
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELA WARE
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`) C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`Defendant.
`)
`_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`VOIRDIRE
`
`Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I am Judge Andrews. We are going to select a jury
`in a civil case called Acceleration Bay LLC, v. Activision Blizzard, Inc.
`
`I am going to ask you a series of questions to help the Court and the attorneys in the jury
`selection process. Before I ask any questions, I am going to ask the Deputy Clerk to swear the
`jury panel to answer any questions truthfully. (To Deputy: Please swear the panel).
`
`If any of you answer "yes" to any of the questions that I ask, please raise your hand, and,
`when recognized by me, please state your jury number. At the end of the questions, the Deputy
`Clerk will ask some of you to take seats in the jury box, and, after that, the lawyers and I may ask
`those of you who answered "yes" to one or more questions to come up to the bench to discuss your
`answers with the lawyers and me.
`
`The presentation of evidence in this case is expected to take 5 days, but jury deliberations
`could extend your service beyond that. The schedule that I expect to keep over the days of evidence
`presentation will include a morning break of fifteen minutes, a lunch break of an hour, and an
`afternoon break of fifteen minutes. We will start at 9:30 a.m. and finish no later than 5 p.m. each
`day.
`
`1. Does the schedule that I have just mentioned present a special problem to any of you?
`
`2. This is a patent infringement lawsuit involving computer game products. The
`Plaintiff is Acceleration Bay. Acceleration Bay owns patents relating to computer
`networking technology. It has sued the defendant, Activision Blizzard, which I will
`refer to as just Activision. Activision makes and sells video games. Acceleration
`Bay alleges that some of those video games infringe four of its patents. Activision
`denies infringement. The jury in this case will be asked to decide whether the video
`games infringe the patents. For those of you who end up being on the jury, I will give
`more detailed instructions on the law later in the case.
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 49481
`
`3. Have any of you heard or read anything about this case from any source, including
`from another person, a press release or the news media?
`
`4. Have any of you heard of Acceleration Bay before today?
`
`5. Have you, or to your knowledge a member of your immediate family, ever had some
`sort of business relationship with Activision, including owning stock in Activision,
`working for Activision, or having other business dealings with Activision?
`
`6. The video games that are at issue in this case are identified under the brand names
`"Destiny," "World of Warcraft" and "Call of Duty." There will be a lot of testimony
`about the games. Is there anything about having these games involved in this case
`that will make it difficult for you to be a fair and impartial juror in this case?
`
`7. Have any of you ever had any experience, good or bad, with Activision, or with these
`video games, that might make it difficult for you to be a fair and impartial juror in this
`case?
`
`8. Do you possess any opinions about Activision or with video games generally that
`might make it difficult for you to be a fair and impartial juror in this case?
`
`9. Do you have any experience designing, making, or selling video games?
`
`10. Do you have any experience working as a network engineer or as a computer
`programmer?
`
`11. The inventors of the patents at issue in this case worked at the Boeing Company. Do
`you or your immediate family have any connection to Boeing, such as having worked
`there or owning stock in Boeing?
`
`12. Do you have any strong feelings, either positive or negative, about the Boeing
`Company?
`
`13. The law firms involved in this case are [limit to those actually appearing]:
`
`a. Fox Rothschild.
`
`b. Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP;
`
`c. Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP;
`
`d. Phillips, Goldman, McLaughlin & Hall, P.A.;
`
`e. Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP;
`
`f. Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP; and
`
`g. Winston & Strawn LLP,
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 49482
`
`The lawyers who appeared in this case and who may appear at trial are [ same as
`above]:
`
`a. Paul Andre;
`
`b. Kathleen B. Barry;
`
`C.
`
`Jordan T. Bergsten
`
`d. Jack B. Blumenfeld;
`
`e. Yuridia Caire;
`
`f. Louis L. Campbell;
`
`g. Gino Cheng;
`
`h. Jonathan A. Cho a;
`
`1. Thomas M. Dunham;
`
`J. Krista M. Enns;
`
`k. David P. Enzminger;
`
`1. Aaron M . Frankel;
`
`m. Aaron E. Hankel;
`
`n. James R. Hannah;
`
`0 . Paul N. Harold;
`
`p. Lisa Kobialka;
`
`q. Stephen J. Kraftschik;
`
`r. Michael Lee;
`
`s. David K. Lin;
`
`t. Cristina Martinez;
`
`u. Joseph C. Masullo;
`
`V. McGraw C. Maxwell;
`
`w. Anup K. Misra;
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 49483
`
`x. Michael M. Murray;
`
`y. Joe S. Netikosol;
`
`z. John C. Phillips, Jr.;
`
`aa. Philip A. Rovner;
`
`bb. Andrew R. Sommer;
`
`cc. Michael A. Tomasulo;
`
`dd. B. Trent Webb;
`
`ee. Dan K. Webb;
`
`ff. Gregory Brian Williams.
`
`Do any of you know any of the attorneys or law firms I have just named?
`
`14. Have any of you or your immediate families had any business dealings with, or been
`employed by, any of these attorneys or law firms?
`
`15. The potential witnesses in this case are [ to be narrowed the morning of trial] :
`
`a. Robert Abarbanel;
`
`b. Joseph Agiato;
`
`C. Byron Beede;
`
`d. Scott Bennett;
`
`e. Harry Bims;
`
`f. Virgil Bourassa;
`
`g. Steven Caliguri;
`
`h. Eric Cole;
`
`1. Patrick Conlin;
`
`J. Patrick Dawson;
`
`k. John Garland;
`
`1. Michael Goodrich;
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 49484
`
`m. Mark Gordon;
`
`n. Pat Griffith;
`
`o. Fred Holt;
`
`p. David Karger;
`
`q. Daniel Kegel;
`
`r.
`
`John Kelly;
`
`s. John Kirk;
`
`t. Robert Kostich;
`
`u. Catharine Lawton;
`
`v. Michael Macedonia;
`
`w. Kurtis McCathem;
`
`x. Nenad Medvidovic;
`
`y. Christine Meyer;
`
`z. Michael Mitzenmacher;
`
`aa. Natasha Radovsky;
`
`bb. Joseph Rumsey;
`
`cc. Saralyn Smith;
`
`dd. Scott Smith;
`
`ee. Mark Terrano;
`
`ff. Ricardo Valerdi;
`
`gg. Joe Ward;
`
`hh. Roger Wolfson; and
`
`ii. John Yaney.
`
`Are you familiar with any of these potential witnesses?
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 614 Filed 10/25/18 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 49485
`
`16. Have you or any member of your immediate family ever been employed by the
`United States Patent and Trademark Office?
`
`17. Have you or a member of your family ever applied for or obtained a United States or
`foreign patent?
`
`18. Have you or any member of your family ever been involved in a dispute about patent
`rights?
`
`19. Do you have any opinions about patents, patent rights, or the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office that might make it difficult for you to be a fair and impartial juror
`in this case?
`
`20. Do you have strong feelings about patents or patent rights?
`
`21. Have you served on a jury in a civil case within the last fifteen years?
`
`22. If you are selected to sit as a-juror in this case, are you aware of any reason why you
`would be unable to render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial?
`
`23. If you are selected to sit as a juror in this case, are you aware of any reason why you
`would not be able to follow the law as I give it to you?
`
`24. Is there anything, such as poor vision, difficulty hearing, difficulty understanding
`spoken or written English, that would make it difficult for you to serve on this jury?
`
`25. This is the last question. Is there anything else, including something you have
`remembered in connection with one of the earlier questions, that you think you would
`like to tell me in connection with your service as a juror in this case?
`
`6
`
`