throbber
Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 9637
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`VB ASSETS, LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC., et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`C.A. No. 1:19-cv-01410-MN
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PROPOSED VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS
`
`Good morning. My name is Maryellen Noreika, and I am the Judge who will be presiding
`
`over the trial in this civil case for which a jury is about to be selected. I am going to ask you some
`
`questions, the purpose of which is to: (1) enable us to determine whether any prospective juror
`
`should be excused for cause; and (2) enable counsel for the parties to exercise their individual
`
`judgment with respect to what are called peremptory challenges, that is, challenges that counsel
`
`can make to a potential juror without giving any reason.
`
`Before I ask any questions, I am going to ask my Deputy to swear the jury panel to answer
`
`all questions truthfully. (Panel sworn.)
`
`You each have a list of the questions that I am also going to read out loud. If you answer
`
`“yes” to any of the questions that I ask, please make a note of that on the list. At the end of the
`
`questions, I will ask whether you answered yes to any question and, if you did, take you out into
`
`my conference room where you will talk with the lawyers and me about your answers.
`
`1
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 9638
`
`
`
`We are having jury selection for a case that will begin today and last up to 5 days – until
`
`Wednesday November 8, 2023. The trial will be timed, so the attorneys must complete their
`
`presentations in that time. It is possible, however, that jury deliberations may require you to be
`
`here longer than the scheduled number of days. Our trial days will run approximately from 9:00
`
`a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day.
`
`With that introduction, my questions are:
`
`1.
`
`Does the schedule that I have just mentioned present a special problem to any of
`
`you?
`
`2.
`
`VB Assets, LLC (“VB Assets”) filed this lawsuit asserting that Amazon.com,
`
`Inc., Amazon.com LLC, Amazon Web Services, Inc., A2Z Development Center, Inc. d/b/a
`
`Lab126, Rawles, LLC, AMZN Mobile LLC, AMZN Mobile 2 LLC, Amazon.com Services, Inc.
`
`f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc., and Amazon Digital Services LLC, which I will refer
`
`to collectively as “Amazon” infringe five patents.1 Amazon has responded by asserting that it
`
`does not infringe VB Assets’s patents and that the patents are invalid. Have you heard anything
`
`about this case prior to today?
`
`
`
`1 The parties are working in good faith to negotiate a stipulation to address certain non-existent
`entities and to substitute Amazon.com Services LLC for defendants Amazon.com, Inc.,
`Amazon.com LLC, Amazon Web Services, Inc., A2Z Development Center, Inc. d/b/a Lab 126,
`AMZN Mobile LLC, AMZN Mobile 2 LLC, Amazon.com Services, Inc. f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment
`Services, Inc., and Amazon Digital Services, LLC as a defendant in-suit.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 9639
`
`
`
`3.
`
`[[VB ASSETS PROPOSAL: This case involves voice-enabled speakers,
`
`such as Echo, and personal assistants like Alexa. Do you have experience with these types
`
`of products?2
`
`4.
`
`VB ASSETS PROPOSAL: Do you have any personal opinions or views
`
`about this type of technology?]]
`
`5.
`
`[[AMAZON PROPOSAL: This case involves voice-enabled speakers, such
`
`as Echo, and personal assistants such as Alexa. Do you have any strong opinions about this
`
`type of technology that could impact your ability to be a fair and impartial juror in this
`
`case?]]3
`
`6.
`
`The lawyers and law firms involved in this case are listed here. Please carefully
`
`review the list.
`
`• Ashby & Geddes, P.A.
`• Fenwick & West LLP
`• Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP
`• Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
`• Neal C. Belgam
`• Ryan S. Benyamin
`• Johnathan L. Chai
`• Dargaye Churnet
`• Rebecca A.E. Fewkes
`• Todd R. Gregorian
`
`
`
`2 VB ASSETS’S POSITION: We believe that it’s helpful to know if any jurors have
`personal experience with the accused products and, if so, whether they have strong opinions
`about the technology. Amazon’s phrasing may result in juror’s with strong feeling about the
`accused products staying silent because they do not feel comfortable stating that they cannot be
`fair and impartial.
`
`3 AMAZON’S POSITION: VB Assets’ Questions 3 and 4 are too open-ended and will create
`an inefficient voir dire process. Amazon’s Questions 5 captures the subject matter of VB Asserts’
`Questions 3 and 4 and will provide for a more efficient voir dire.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 9640
`
`
`
`• J. David Hadden
`• Johnson Kuncheria
`• Su Li
`• Matthew Macdonald
`• Melanie L. Mayer
`• Andrew C. Mayo
`• Steven J. Balick
`• Jason Z. Miller
`• Jamie Y. Otto
`• Ravi Ranganath
`• Vigen Salmastlian
`• Saina S. Shamilov
`• Ryan R. Smith
`• Brad Tennis
`• Allen Wang
`• Jeffrey Ware
`• Min Wu
`• James C. Yoon
`• Eric B. Young
`• Eric Zhou
`
`Do you or your immediate family members or close friends know of, have any business
`
`dealings with, or have any employment or other relationship with any of these attorneys or law
`
`firms?
`
`list.
`
`7.
`
`The potential witnesses in this case are listed here. Please carefully review the
`
`• Larry Baldwin
`• Rino Caruccio
`• Frederic Deramat
`• Adesh Desai
`• Philippe Di Cristo
`• Cassius Elston
`• Tom Freeman
`• Scott Hayden
`• Björn Hoffmeister
`• Michael Johnson
`• Todd Kenck
`• Mike Kennewick
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 9641
`
`
`
`• Rich Kennewick
`• Vinod Krishnan
`• David Meckstroth
`• Rajiv Mehta
`• John Peck
`• David Pepper
`• Joe Polifroni
`• Nathaniel Polish
`• Karthik Ramakrishnan
`• Brett Reed
`• Nick Siska
`• Nikko Ström
`• David Thomas
`• Ryan Thomas
`• Keith Ugone
`• Kelly Vanee
`• Kuansan Wang
`• Matt Wong
`
`Are you or is anyone in your immediate family or your close friends related to, or
`
`personally acquainted with, any of those individuals?
`
`8.
`
`Have you or anyone in your immediate family or close friends had any
`
`experience with patents, patent law, patented technology, or the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office?
`
`9.
`
`Have you or any member of your immediate family or close friends ever applied
`
`for or obtained a patent, copyright, and/or trademark?
`
`10.
`
`Do you have any opinions about patents or the patent system that could impact
`
`your ability to be a fair and impartial juror in this case?
`
`11.
`
`Have you or has anyone in your immediate family or close friends been
`
`employed by Amazon or any of its affiliated companies, VB Asserts, or VoiceBox?
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 9642
`
`
`
`12.
`
`Have you or has anyone in your immediate family or close friends had any
`
`business dealings with Amazon or any of its affiliated companies, VB Assets, or VoiceBox, that
`
`could impact your ability to be a fair and impartial juror in this case?
`
`13.
`
`Do you or does anyone in your immediate family or close friends own stock in
`
`Amazon [[AMAZON PROPOSAL: that constitutes 10% or more of your or their net
`
`worth?]]45
`
`14.
`
`Do you or does anyone in your immediate family or close friends own stock in
`
`VB Assets or VoiceBox?
`
`15.
`
`Do you have any strong feelings, positive or negative, concerning Amazon, VB
`
`Assets, or VoiceBox, or their products or services, that could impact your ability to be a fair and
`
`impartial juror in this case?
`
`16.
`
`Do you have any formal education or training or have you worked in any of the
`
`following fields: law, engineering, computer programming, computer science, software
`
`development, voice assistant technology, or speech processing?
`
`17.
`
`Have you or any member of your immediate family ever been a plaintiff, a
`
`defendant, or a witness in a lawsuit?
`
`
`
`4 AMAZON’S POSITION: Questions 13 with the addition proposed by Amazon has been
`asked by the Court at least in TrackTime LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., D. Del. No. 1:18-cv-1518-MN,
`Sept. 13, 2023 Trial Tr. at 23:14–1–6. The question as proposed by VB Assets may result in too
`many Yes answers and affect the efficiency of the voir dire process while not impacting any
`individual’s ability to be a fair and impartial juror. Amazon also does not object to the Court
`eliminating questions 13 and 14.
`
`5 VB ASSETS’s POSITION: Defendants believe that understanding if a juror has a financial
`stake in a party is important. A follow-up question can clarify the type of ownership interest.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 242 Filed 09/28/23 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 9643
`
`
`
`18.
`
`Have you or any member of your immediate family ever served as a juror in a
`
`criminal or civil lawsuit?
`
`19.
`
`Have you or any member of your immediate family ever had any experience
`
`with the legal system that could impact your ability to be a fair and impartial juror?
`
`20.
`
`This is the last question. Do you know of any other matter that you believe
`
`should be called to the Court’s attention as having some bearing upon your qualifications or
`
`ability to sit as a juror, or that you think may prevent you from rendering a fair and impartial
`
`verdict based solely upon the evidence and my instructions as to the law?
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket