Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 1 of 164 PageID #:
`6966
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 2 of 164 PageID #:
`6967
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 17-cv-868-CFC-SRF
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Defendant.
`
`UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
`and CARMEL LABORATORIES, LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`L’ORÉAL USA, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AND CARMEL LABORATORIES, LLC’S
`FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT L’OREAL USA, INC.
`Pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules and Orders of
`
`this Court, Plaintiffs University of Massachusetts (“UMass”) and Carmel Laboratories, LLC
`
`(“Carmel Labs”), serves these interrogatories upon Defendant L’Oréal USA, Inc. (“L’Oréal”),
`
`which shall serve a copy of its answers and objections, if any, within thirty (30) days after
`
`service of these interrogatories.
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`1. The term “UMass” refers to the University of Massachusetts, including any of its past
`
`and present affiliates, operating divisions, campuses, subsidiaries, directors, officers, agents,
`
`employees, representatives, and all persons acting on its behalf.
`
`2. The term “Carmel Labs” refers to Carmel Laboratories, LLC, including any of its past
`
`and present affiliates, operating divisions, parent corporations, subsidiaries, directors, officers,
`
`agents, employees, representatives, and all persons acting on its behalf.The terms “Defendants,”
`
`“You,” “Your,” or “AT&T” shall refer to defendants AT&T Mobility LLC and AT&T Corp.
`
`(collectively “AT&T”), and shall include AT&T’s past and present subsidiaries, affiliates,
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 3 of 164 PageID #:
`6968
`
`divisions, successors or assignees, and their respective officers, directors, employees,
`
`consultants, representative and agents.
`
`3. The terms “Defendant,” “You,” “Your,” or “L’Oréal” shall refer to defendant L’Oréal
`
`USA, Inc., and shall include L’Oréal S.A. as well as L’Oréal USA Inc.’s parent, subsidiaries,
`
`affiliates, divisions, successors or assignees, and their respective officers, directors, employees,
`
`consultants, representatives, and agents.
`
`4. The term “Present Lawsuit” refers to the case styled University of Massachusetts, et al. v.
`
`L’Oréal USA, Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF, pending in the United States District
`
`Court for the District of Delaware.
`
`5. The term “Document” or “Documents” is used in the broadest sense permitted by the
`
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and means the original (or any copy when originals are not
`
`available) and any drafts or non-identical copies thereof, whether different from the original
`
`because of interlineations, receipt stamp, notation of copy sent or received or otherwise, of any
`
`email, instant message, voicemail, book, pamphlet, periodical, letter, report, note, memorandum,
`
`record, minutes, calendar or diary entry, transcript, study, compilation, analysis, tabulation, map,
`
`diagram, drawing, plan, picture, summary, working paper, chart, paper, graph index, data sheet,
`
`data processing card, computer printout, summary of a computer printout, tape, contract,
`
`agreement, lease, ledger, journal, balance sheet, account, invoice, purchase order, receipt, billing
`
`record, financial data, financial statement, file, diary, film, trip tickets, telex, teletype or other
`
`messages, telegram, expense vouchers, instructions, bulletins or any other writing or recording of
`
`information, as well as all tape recordings, computer tapes, discs and other electronic or
`
`mechanical recordings, however produced, maintained or reproduced, including information
`
`stored in or generated by a computer whether or not ever printed out or displayed, within the
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 4 of 164 PageID #:
`6969
`
`possession, custody or control of plaintiff or any of its officers, directors, employees, attorneys,
`
`or other agents and/or representatives.
`
`6. The
`
`term “Person” means natural person, corporation,
`
`firm, company, sole
`
`proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, association, institute, or other business, legal or
`
`governmental entity or association, including any directors, officers, employees, agents or
`
`representatives thereof.
`
`7. The term “Agreement” means a contract, agreement, arrangement, or understanding,
`
`formal or informal, oral or written, between two or more persons.
`
`8. The term “Communication” refers to any transfer of information, oral or written, be it in
`
`the form of facts, ideas, inquiries, opinions or otherwise, by any means, at any time or place,
`
`under any circumstances, and is not limited to transfers between persons, but includes other
`
`transfers, such as records and memoranda to the file.
`
`9. The phrase “Relating To” means discussing, describing, referring to, pertaining to,
`
`containing, analyzing, studying, reporting on, commenting on, evidencing, constituting, setting
`
`forth, considering, recommending, concerning, or pertaining to, in whole or in part.
`
`10. The terms “Asserted Patents” and “Patents-in-Suit” shall mean United States Patents No.
`
`6,423,327 and 6,645,513.
`
`11. The term “’327 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 6,423,327.
`
`12. The term “’513 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 6,645,513.
`
`13. The term “Prior Art” means any evidence qualifying as prior art to the Patents-in-Suit
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and/or 35 U.S.C. § 103.
`
`14. The terms “all” and “each” shall be construed as “and,” “each,” and “and/or.”
`
`15. The term “any” should be understood in either its most or least inclusive sense as will
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 5 of 164 PageID #:
`6970
`
`bring within the scope of the topic all responses that might otherwise be construed to be out of its
`
`scope.
`
`16. The term “including” shall mean including but not limited to.
`
`17. The terms “relate,” “relating,” or “related” mean in any way, directly or indirectly, in
`
`whole or part, relating to, concerning, referring to, discussing, mentioning, regarding, pertaining
`
`to, describing, reflecting, containing, analyzing, studying, reporting on, commenting on,
`
`evidencing, constituting, setting forth, considering, recommending, modifying, amending,
`
`confirming, endorsing, representing, supporting, qualifying, terminating, revoking, refuting,
`
`undermining, canceling, contradicting or negating.
`
`18. The terms “and” and “or” shall be construed disjunctively or conjunctively as necessary
`
`to bring within the scope of these topics all information which might otherwise be construed to
`
`be outside their scope.
`
`19. All requests apply equally to sales made in the United States as well as sales made in any
`
`other country.
`
`20. References to the singular shall include the plural, and references to the plural shall
`
`include the singular as may be appropriate to construe the individual document requests in their
`
`broadest form.
`
`21. The masculine form of a noun or pronoun shall be considered to include within its
`
`meaning the feminine form of the noun or pronoun, and vice versa as may be appropriate to
`
`make the individual document requests inclusive rather than exclusive.
`
`22. “State in detail” means to give a complete and full description concerning the matter
`
`about which inquiry is made, including the full name, address and telephone number of persons
`
`involved, if appropriate, along with the dates, times, places, amounts, acts, logic, and other
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 6 of 164 PageID #:
`6971
`
`particulars that make the answers to the interrogatory fair and meaningful.
`
`23. “Identify,” when used with reference to:
`
`a.
`
`an individual person, means to state his or her full name, present or last known
`
`employer, job title, general job description, present or last known residence addresses and
`
`telephone number, and present or last known business addresses and telephone number;
`
`b.
`
`a business entity, means to state the full name and address of the entity and the
`
`names and positions of the individual or individuals connected with such entity who have
`
`knowledge of the information requested.
`
`c.
`
`a document, means to identify the document by bates number, or if it is not bates
`
`numbered, to state the type of document (letter, memorandum, email, etc.), its dates, author(s) or
`
`originator(s), addresse(s), all individuals who received copies of the document, the identity of
`
`persons known or presumed by you to have present possession, custody or control thereof, and a
`
`brief description of the subject matter and present location.
`
`d.
`
`An offering, system or method means to specify a part number, trade name,
`
`catalog number, version number, and any other designation used to refer to the product, system
`
`or method.
`
`INSTRUCTIONS
`
`1. Each interrogatory shall be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it
`
`is objected to, in which event the objecting party shall state the reasons for objection and shall
`
`answer to the extent the interrogatory is not objectionable. All grounds for an objection to an
`
`interrogatory shall be stated with specifically. The answers are to be signed under oath by the
`
`person making them.
`
`2. If the procedure for answering interrogatories as authorized by Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(d) is
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 7 of 164 PageID #:
`6972
`
`used, for each interrogatory and subpart thereof, You must identify the production with
`
`specificity (i.e., bates numbers of the specific document or group of documents).
`
`3. If You withhold any documents subject to Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(d) under a claim of
`
`privilege, You shall furnish a list specifying each such document and setting forth the following
`
`information: (i) the date of the document; (ii) the number of pages of the document; (iii) the
`
`name and last known address of each person who prepared or participated in the preparation of
`
`the document; (iv) the name and last known address of each addressee or other person to whom
`
`the document, or any part thereof, was sent or to whom the document or its contents, or any part
`
`thereof, was disclosed; (v) a summary of the general subject matter of the document (and such
`
`other information as is necessary to identify the document such as whether the document is a
`
`letter or memorandum); (vi) a statement of the basis upon which the asserted privilege is
`
`claimed; and (vii) the individual document request herein to which the document is responsive. If
`
`no documents are withheld under a claim of privilege, so state. Any document or part of a
`
`document withheld under a claim of privilege must be preserved.
`
`4. You must preserve and produce all information and documents in Your possession,
`
`custody or control that are relevant to the claims or defenses in this lawsuit or reasonably
`
`calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Especially since You are in the best
`
`position to know the nature and extent of discoverable information and documents in your
`
`possession, custody or control, any limits on these discovery requests should not be used to
`
`justify the loss, overwriting, purging, destruction or non-production of anything discoverable.
`
`Before You permit any such loss, overwriting, purging, deletion, or destruction, you should
`
`confer with Plaintiff to seek to resolve the issue consistent with the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure, Local Rules, Local Patent Rules and orders to the Court.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 8 of 164 PageID #:
`6973
`
`5. If any documents referred to in Your response to these interrogatories were, but are no
`
`longer in your possession, custody or control, state what disposition was made of them and
`
`when. If any document referred to in response to these interrogatories has been lost or destroyed,
`
`state in detail the circumstances of such loss or destruction and identify each document lost or
`
`destroyed (and all files that contained such documents).
`
`6. These discovery requests are deemed to be continuing in nature and, to the extent
`
`required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, You must supplement Your responses with
`
`information or documents that may become known or available after the date of Your initial
`
`response.
`
`INTERROGATORIES
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Explain how and when You first became aware of the Patents-in-
`
`Suit, and identify the person(s) at L’Oréal who first learned of the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Describe in detail all Your communications regarding the Patents-
`
`in-Suit, the inventors of the Patents-in-Suit, and/or Carmel Labs and its employees and/or
`
`affiliates.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Identify every product You have ever sold in the United States
`
`that contains adenosine as an ingredient, including but not limited to every name You have sold
`
`such product under.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 4: For each product identified in response to Interrogatory No. 3,
`
`provide a full list of ingredients as well as the formulation.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Describe all Your testing, including the methodology and results,
`
`regarding or relating to adenosine’s effect on human skin, including but not limited to
`
`penetration of adenosine to the epidermis or dermis.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 9 of 164 PageID #:
`6974
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Describe in detail when and the reason(s) why You determined to
`
`use adenosine as an ingredient in any product You have sold in the United States, including but
`
`not limited to any testing and/or research that was relevant to Your decision to include adenosine
`
`in Your products.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Describe in detail Your efforts to market and/or sell products
`
`containing adenosine, including but not limited to any materials you have created that tout the
`
`benefit(s) of adenosine for human skin.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 8: For each product identified in response to Interrogatory No. 3,
`
`provide, in the form of a chart, by customer and on a monthly basis, a complete description of:
`
`all revenues received from sales of the product; all units sold of the product; total revenues
`
`received from customers who have purchased the product; and in the form of a chart and on a
`
`monthly basis, a complete description of Your gross, contribution, and operating profits and
`
`gross, contribution, and operating profit margins from sales of the product since 2009.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 9: State all facts that you contend support Your contention that
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel
`
`and/or disclaimer.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 10: State all facts that you contend support Your contention that
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of waiver, equitable estoppel
`
`and/or other equitable defenses.
`
`DATED: July 15, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FARNAN LLP
`
`
`/s/ Brian E. Farnan
`Brian E. Farnan (Bar No. 4089)
`Michael J. Farnan (Bar No. 5165)
`919 North Market Street, 12th Floor
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 10 of 164 PageID #:
`6975
`
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Telephone: (302) 777-0300
`Facsimile: (302) 777-0301
`bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`mfarnan@farnanlaw,com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Of Counsel:
`William Christopher Carmody
`Tamar E. Lusztig
`Beatrice C. Franklin
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
`New York, NY 10019
`Telephone: (212) 336-8330
`Facsimile: (212) 336-8340
`bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
`tlusztig@susmangodfrey.com
`bfranklin@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Justin A. Nelson
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
`Houston, Texas 77002
`Telephone: (713) 651-9366
`Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
`jnelson@susmangodfrey.com
`
`
`Attorneys for University of Massachusetts
`and Carmel Laboratories, LLC
`
`Attorneys for Carmel Laboratories, LLC
`
`
`
`
`Matthew B. Lowrie
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`111 Huntington Avenue, Suite 2600
`Boston, MA 02199
`Telephone: (617) 342-4000
`Facsimile: (617) 342-4001
`mlowrie@foley.com
`
`
`
`
`COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
`
`By its attorney,
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 11 of 164 PageID #:
`6976
`
`
`
`
`MAURA HEALEY
`ATTORNEY GENERAL
`
`By: William Christopher Carmody
`William Christopher Carmody
`Special Assistant Attorney General
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
`New York, NY 10019
`Telephone: (212) 336-8330
`Facsimile: (212) 336-8340
`bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney for University of Massachusetts
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 12 of 164 PageID #:
`6977
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I, Brian E. Farnan, hereby certify that on July 15, 2019, a copy of University of
`
`Massachusetts and Carmel Laboratories, LLC’s First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant L’Oreal
`
`USA, Inc. was served on the following as indicated:
`
`Via E-Mail
`Frederick L. Cottrell, III
`Jeffrey L. Moyer
`Katharine L. Mowery
`Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.
`One Rodney Square
`920 N. King Street
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801
`cottrell@rlf.com
`moyer@rlf.com
`mowery@rlf.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant L’Oreal USA, Inc.
`
`Via E-Mail
`Dennis S. Ellis
`Katherine F. Murray
`Serli Polatoglu
`Naveen Modi
`Joseph E. Palys
`Paul Hastings LLP
`dennisellis@paulhastings.com
`katharinemurray@paulhastings.com
`serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`josephpalys@paulhastings.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant L’Oreal USA, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Brian E. Farnan
`Brian E. Farnan (Bar No. 4089)
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 13 of 164 PageID #:
`6978
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT B
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 14 of 164 PageID #:
`6979
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REDACTED
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 15 of 164 PageID #:
`6980
`
`EXHIBIT C
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 16 of 164 PageID #:
`6981
`
`From:
`To:
`
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`Date:
`
`Murray, Katherine F.
`Tamar Lusztig; Polatoglu, Serli; Ellis, Dennis S.; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC; "Frederick Cottrell"; "Jason
`Rawnsley"; "Jeffrey Moyer"; Palys, Joseph E.; "Katharine Mowery"; Modi, Naveen
`Beatrice Franklin; Bill Carmody; "Brian Farnan"; Justin A. Nelson; Keeley Lombardo; "Lucas I. Silva"; "Matthew
`Lowrie"; Rodney Polanco
`RE: UMass v. L"Oreal
`Wednesday, October 16, 2019 6:12:18 PM
`
`Thank you Tamar,
`
`Below is a slightly more detailed summary of our call so that we are all on the same page.
`
`Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Re: Access to L’Oréal S.A. materials
`
`We explained that L’Oréal USA cannot offer a witness to speak on this topic, as this information
`would be known to L’Oréal S.A., not L’Oréal USA. Nonetheless, we explained that, with respect to
`relevant documents, we are not going to insist that Plaintiffs proceed through the Hague to obtain
`documents from L’Oréal S.A. Rather, we will make all reasonable efforts to collect and produce any
`relevant documents maintained by L’Oréal S.A.
`
`RFP No. 31 – Marketing Documents
`
`We explained that this request, which seeks all marketing documents for any product containing
`adenosine, is overly burdensome, and L’Oréal USA would not be able to produce all those
`documents before trial, or even afterwards, as this would amount to hundreds of thousands, if not
`millions of pages. We proposed a more workable approach, wherein L’Oréal USA would provide
`targeted marketing materials for 30 products at a time, which would include product packaging and
`launch materials. As we explained, we believe the launch materials would be helpful as they identify
`the claims that have been cleared for each product. We do not know if each brand maintains such
`documents, but we agreed to produce them if they do exist. We also asked you to provide us with a
`list of any products Plaintiffs are particularly interested in so we can include those products in the
`first phase.
`
`RFP No. 30 – Samples of Discontinued Products
`
`We agreed to look into whether L’Oréal USA keeps extra inventory of products no longer on the
`market. If that inventory includes more than one of any particular product sought by Plaintiffs, then
`we may provide a sample, but we should defer this discussion until after we produce the technical
`documents. In the meantime, we suggested that Plaintiffs obtain samples of products currently on
`the market by purchasing those products.
`
`Supplemental Interrogatory Responses and Document Production
`
`With respect to timing for the document production, as you note below, we explained that the
`technical documents would be produced first in the next few weeks, followed by the marketing
`materials for the first phase of products. Once those documents are produced, L’Oréal USA will
`supplement its interrogatory responses to provide the bates numbers for the documents that
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 17 of 164 PageID #:
`6982
`
`support its interrogatory responses.
`
`Kathy
`
`
`From: Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 3:06 PM
`To: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>; Ellis, Dennis S.
`<DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-
`USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell' <cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley'
`<rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys, Joseph E.
`<josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray, Katherine F.
`<katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen <naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <KLombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: [EXT] RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Counsel,
`
`Thanks for your time earlier this week. Here’s where we stand on the issues discussed on that call.
`
`You said you’d make your first production—which will include “research and innovation” documents
`—2-3 weeks from now, and will then supplement your responses to our interrogatories 3, 5, and 6.
`Similarly, you said you’d be able to update your responses to our interrogatories no. 1 and 2 at that
`time.
`
`With respect to RFPs no. 30 and 31, you will find out from your client whether your client has
`maintained (and can produce to us) product samples for discontinued products that are not publicly
`available, which we emailed you about recently. And you will start producing the “launch materials”
`for the accused products in about a month, on a rolling basis of approximately 30 products at a time.
`These launch materials should provide us with certain marketing information about the accused
`products.
`
`With respect to discovery from L’Oréal S.A., you represented that you are able to and will collect
`relevant and responsive documents from L’Oréal S.A. and produce them to us, so that we will not
`need to pursue those materials directly from L’Oréal S.A. through the Hague. Based on that
`representation, we can agree to table our recently-served 30(b)(6) notice.
`
`Thanks again. Please do let us know about the discontinued products as soon as you can.
`
`-Tamar
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 18 of 164 PageID #:
`6983
`
`From: Tamar Lusztig
`Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 12:11 PM
`To: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>; Ellis, Dennis S.
`<DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-
`USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell' <cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley'
`<rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys, Joseph E.
`<josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray, Katherine F.
`<katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen <naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <klombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Serli, Wednesday is Yom Kippur. On Thursday we will be busy getting out our infringement
`contentions. If you are unavailable on Friday, we are free on Monday between 1 PM ET and 4:30 PM
`ET. Let us know when during that timeframe works for you. And, as I already requested, please let us
`know what you want to discuss on this call.
`
`From: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>
`Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 8:25 PM
`To: Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Ellis, Dennis S. <DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>;
`PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell'
`<cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley' <rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys,
`Joseph E. <josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray,
`Katherine F. <katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen
`<naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <KLombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Tamar,
`
`Unfortunately, that time will not work for us. If you are unavailable on Wednesday or Thursday, we
`will have to schedule the call for Monday the 14th.
`
`Best,
`-Serli
`
`From: Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>
`Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 2:40 PM
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 19 of 164 PageID #:
`6984
`
`To: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>; Ellis, Dennis S.
`<DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-
`USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell' <cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley'
`<rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys, Joseph E.
`<josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray, Katherine F.
`<katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen <naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <KLombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: [EXT] RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Serli, it looks like we misread our calendars and need to do this call at 4 PM ET on Friday. We’ll
`circulate the calendar invite for then.
`
`From: Tamar Lusztig
`Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 1:16 PM
`To: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>; Ellis, Dennis S.
`<DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-
`USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell' <cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley'
`<rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys, Joseph E.
`<josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray, Katherine F.
`<katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen <naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <klombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Serli,
`
`We need to know which discovery responses you are agreeing to supplement in order to forgo a
`motion to compel. That said, since there seems to be something you want to discuss with respect to
`this issue, we are free to discuss it again with you on Friday at 3 PM ET. We’ll circulate a calendar
`invite with a conference line. Please let us know before that call what “additional issues” you have
`run into so that we can prepare to address them, and let us know on or before Friday’s call which
`discovery responses you are agreeing to supplement.
`
`-Tamar
`
`
`From: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>
`Sent: Sunday, October 6, 2019 10:52 PM
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 20 of 164 PageID #:
`6985
`
`To: Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Ellis, Dennis S. <DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>;
`PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell'
`<cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley' <rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys,
`Joseph E. <josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray,
`Katherine F. <katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen
`<naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <KLombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Tamar,
`
`As I stated in my previous email, notwithstanding our objections and the breadth of these requests,
`as well as your failure to send us the list of products you contend are missing from our response to
`Interrogatory No. 3, we are agreeable to supplementing certain interrogatories as appropriate.
`However, in our efforts to be accommodating and based on our prior discussions, we have
`encountered additional issues with respect to Plaintiffs’ requests that need to be addressed. This
`should be done before any call with the Court, so your request for local counsel involvement is
`premature. As previously requested, please let us know when you are available for a call Thursday
`or Friday.
`
`Best,
`-Serli
`
`From: Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>
`Sent: Saturday, October 5, 2019 9:18 AM
`To: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu@paulhastings.com>; Ellis, Dennis S.
`<DennisEllis@paulhastings.com>; PH-UMASS v. L’Oreal USDC <PH-UMass-LOreal-
`USDC@paulhastings.com>; 'Frederick Cottrell' <cottrell@rlf.com>; 'Jason Rawnsley'
`<rawnsley@rlf.com>; 'Jeffrey Moyer' <moyer@rlf.com>; Palys, Joseph E.
`<josephpalys@paulhastings.com>; 'Katharine Mowery' <mowery@rlf.com>; Murray, Katherine F.
`<katherinemurray@paulhastings.com>; Modi, Naveen <naveenmodi@paulhastings.com>
`Cc: Beatrice Franklin <BFranklin@susmangodfrey.com>; Bill Carmody
`<bcarmody@SusmanGodfrey.com>; 'Brian Farnan' <bfarnan@farnanlaw.com>; Justin A. Nelson
`<jnelson@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Keeley Lombardo <KLombardo@susmangodfrey.com>; 'Lucas I.
`Silva' <lsilva@foley.com>; 'Matthew Lowrie' <mlowrie@foley.com>; Rodney Polanco
`<RPolanco@susmangodfrey.com>
`Subject: [EXT] RE: UMass v. L'Oreal
`
`Thanks for agreeing to update your interrogatory responses, Serli. We asked that you update specific
`responses—nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 11—as well as agree to provide documents and things in
`response to our RFP no. 30, which you previously changed the language to in your response and
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00868-CFC-SRF Document 172-1 Filed 05/20/20 Page 21 of 164 PageID #:
`6986
`
`then called (based on your change) “nonsensical.” Your email does not indicate which, if any, of
`these discovery responses you are agreeing to update. Please confirm by the close of business
`(Eastern) on Monday that you will be providing an update to all of the interrogatories and the RFP
`that I just listed in the next two weeks, or let us know when your local counsel is free to call the
`Court on Tuesday to set up a hearing for our motion to compel.
`
`With respect to your request to have another call, we’d be happy to have a call (not on Yom Kippur,
`of course), but can you please tell us what, specifically, you propose to discuss on this call? It is not
`clear from your email.
`
`-Tamar
`
`From: Polatoglu, Serli <serlipolatoglu