throbber
Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 21796
`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 1 of 6 PagelD #: 21796
`
`EXHIBIT 3
`EXHIBIT 3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 21797
`
`Haunschild, Philip
`From:
`Li, Yan-Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>
`Sent:
`Thursday, May 23, 2024 8:19 PM
`To:
`Haunschild, Philip; Genevant Team; 'Arbutus_MoFo'; *jshaw@shawkeller.com; 'Karen E. Keller
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com)'; 'Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com)'; 'Emily DiBenedetto'
`#KEModernaSpikevaxService; 'Jack Blumenfeld (jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com)'; 'Egan, Brian P.';
`'Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com)'
`RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22-252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18)
`
`Subject:
`
`Cc:
`
`[CONTAINS INFORMATION DESIGNATED HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL BY MODERNA] 

`Hi Philip: 

`Thanks for your emails, and for the meet and confer last week. We have considered our discussions and the issues raised in 
`Plaintiffs’ May 9, 2024 letter. We disagree as to any alleged prejudice to Plaintiffs. By contrast, Moderna has undergone an 
`extremely burdensome investigation, while still fully complying with its notice and confidentiality obligations to foreign 
`governments, in providing information responsive to the non‐objectionable scope of Plaintiffs’ Interrogatory No. 18 (and 19–21) 
`pertaining to “vaccines manufactured abroad and sold abroad.” D.I. 229. 

`The crux of Plaintiffs’ May 9, 2024 letter appears to focus only on “negotiations” as identified in subpart (3) of Interrogatory No. 18. 
`Plaintiffs should know, yet ignore, that “pricing and contracting negotiations in the United States alone do not constitute or 
`transform [] extraterritorial activities into a sale within the United States” when substantial activities of a sales transaction, such as 
`delivery and performance under the sales contract, occur entirely outside the United States—as is the case here. Halo Elecs., Inc. v. 
`Pulse Elecs., Inc., 831 F.3d 1369, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Indeed, U.S. patent laws are to be understood against a background 
`presumption against extraterritorial reach. Microsoft Corp. v. AT & T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 444 (2007). 

`Your identification of certain documents as purportedly showing “substantial sales activity” in the United States before (or even 
`after) June 2021 mischaracterizes both the documents and the facts that Plaintiffs have been provided by Moderna.
`


`
` This is incorrect. 
`
`There is no “sales in China.”  
`

`


`

`Your reliance on Apeldyn and McGinley presupposes that Plaintiffs have actually demonstrated relevance for OUS discovery, given 
`the strong presumption against any extraterritorial reach of U.S. patent law. Plaintiffs have failed to do so, and continue to base 
`their broad sweeping discovery demands on mere suspicion and speculation. Tessera, Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., No. 16‐380, 2017 WL 
`4876215, at *5 (D. Del. Oct. 24, 2017). In view of Plaintiffs’ failure, Moderna does not agree to produce its pre‐June 2021 or post‐
`June 2021 OUS supply agreements. 

`Best regards, 
`Yan‐Xin  

`Yan-Xin Li
`------------------------------------------------------------
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`555 California Street, San Francisco, CA 94104
`T +1 415 439 1618
`------------------------------------------------------------
`yanxin.li@kirkland.com  

`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 21798
`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`
`  
`
`From: Haunschild, Philip <phaunschild@wc.com>  
`Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 7:40 AM 
`To: Li, Yan‐Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>; Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' 
`<Arbutus MoFo@mofo.com>; *jshaw@shawkeller.com <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; 'Karen E. Keller 
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com)' <kkeller@shawkeller.com>; 'Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com)' 
`<nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; 'Emily DiBenedetto' <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: #KEModernaSpikevaxService <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; 'Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com)' <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; 'Egan, Brian P.' <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`'Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com)' <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18) 

` Hi Yan‐Xin,  

`It is now just over a week from the close of fact discovery, and we still have not heard back from Moderna regarding the 
`issues raised in our May 9 letter.  Can you please get back to us by COB tomorrow?  Thank you. 

`Philip N. Haunschild 
`Associate | Williams and Connolly LLP 
`680 Maine Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20024 
`202‐434‐5979 | phaunschild@wc.com | www.wc.com 

`From: Haunschild, Philip  
`Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 6:44 PM 
`To: 'Li, Yan‐Xin' <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>; Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' 
`<Arbutus MoFo@mofo.com>; '*jshaw@shawkeller.com' <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; 'Karen E. Keller 
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com)' <kkeller@shawkeller.com>; 'Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com)' 
`<nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; 'Emily DiBenedetto' <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: '#KEModernaSpikevaxService' <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; 'Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com)' <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; 'Egan, Brian P.' <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`'Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com)' <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18) 

`Hi Yan‐Xin, 

`Thank you for the meet‐and‐confer yesterday.  We understand from our discussion that Moderna will be reverting 
`regarding the issues we have raised in our May 9 letter in the next few days.  We would ask for your response no later 
`than COB Thursday, May 16, as Plaintiffs continue to be prejudiced by the delay in providing these materials.   

`As to Moderna’s proposal to put up Mr. Brackmann tomorrow as a 30(b)(6) witness on Topics 41 – 43 with the limitation 
`that he would only speak to the content of Moderna’s response to Interrogatory No. 18, we cannot accept Moderna’s 
`proposed limitations.  We understand that Moderna is only proposing to designate Mr. Brackmann on the content of 
`Moderna’s interrogatory response, and will not put up a witness on the further supplements to Interrogatory No. 18 
`that we are requesting to obtain a complete answer, or to address the documents that Moderna has not yet 
`produced.  Plaintiffs cannot accept these unreasonable limitations, which amount to nothing more than the witness 
`repeating what Moderna’s lawyers wrote in the interrogatory responses.  Plaintiffs are entitled to test those responses 
`in discovery, including with documents that Moderna has yet to produce.  As we said on the call, however, we are willing 
`to work with Moderna to reach a limited scope of deposition regarding the documents Moderna produces and/or the 
`facts in further supplements to Interrogatory No. 18, as we have requested. 

`With respect to Moderna’s production of board materials, we understand that Moderna is still collecting and preparing 
`these materials for production.  We reiterate what we said on the call:  Moderna’s delay in producing these materials 
`has been substantial and unjustified.  Plaintiffs cannot be expected to depose Moderna’s executive witnesses next week 
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 21799
`
`in the absence of these materials and without adequate time to review them.  Moderna has been under Court order to 
`produce these materials for nearly three months, and Plaintiffs cannot be expected to review them in the short window 
`of time remaining.  Accordingly, we will reserve the right to recall Moderna’s witnesses who will be deposed this week 
`and next.  We again ask that these documents (or any that are ready) be produced immediately and without further 
`delay. 

`Thank you,  


`Philip N. Haunschild 
`Associate | Williams and Connolly LLP 
`680 Maine Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20024 
`202‐434‐5979 | phaunschild@wc.com | www.wc.com 

`From: Haunschild, Philip  
`Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 10:25 AM 
`To: Li, Yan‐Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>; Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' 
`<Arbutus MoFo@mofo.com>; *jshaw@shawkeller.com <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; Karen E. Keller 
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com) <kkeller@shawkeller.com>; Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com) 
`<nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; Emily DiBenedetto <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: #KEModernaSpikevaxService <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com) <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; Egan, Brian P. <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com) <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18) 

`Hi Yan‐Xin, 

`Plaintiffs are available at 5:30 p.m. ET tomorrow.  We can use the following dial‐in: 
`
`Dial-in by phone  
`+1 332-249-0718,,799706732# United States, New York City
`Find a local number
`Phone conference ID: 799 706 732#
`

`Thank you, 

`Philip N. Haunschild 
`Associate | Williams and Connolly LLP 
`680 Maine Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20024 
`202‐434‐5979 | phaunschild@wc.com | www.wc.com 

`From: Li, Yan‐Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>  
`Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 9:09 AM 
`To: Haunschild, Philip <phaunschild@wc.com>; Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' 
`<Arbutus MoFo@mofo.com>; *jshaw@shawkeller.com <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; Karen E. Keller 
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com) <kkeller@shawkeller.com>; Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com) 
`<nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; Emily DiBenedetto <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: #KEModernaSpikevaxService <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com) <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; Egan, Brian P. <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com) <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18) 
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 21800
`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`
` 
`
` 
`

`

`
` 
`
` 
`

`

`

`

`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`

`Philip: 

`As to your demand for a meet and confer with Delaware counsel, we are not available today. We can be available Tuesday, May 14 
`at or after 5:30 pm ET.  


`Yan-Xin Li
`------------------------------------------------------------
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`555 California Street, San Francisco, CA 94104
`T +1 415 439 1618
`------------------------------------------------------------
`yanxin.li@kirkland.com  

`From: Haunschild, Philip <phaunschild@wc.com>  
`Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2024 3:44 PM 
`To: Li, Yan‐Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>; Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' 
`<Arbutus MoFo@mofo.com>; *jshaw@shawkeller.com <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; Karen E. Keller 
`(kkeller@shawkeller.com) <kkeller@shawkeller.com>; Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com) 
`<nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; Emily DiBenedetto <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: #KEModernaSpikevaxService <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com) <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; Egan, Brian P. <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com) <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: RE: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response (No. 18) 

` Hi Yan‐Xin, 

`Please see the attached correspondence. 

`Thank you, 

`Philip N. Haunschild 
`Associate | Williams and Connolly LLP 
`680 Maine Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20024 
`202‐434‐5979 | phaunschild@wc.com | www.wc.com 

`From: Li, Yan‐Xin <yanxin.li@kirkland.com>  
`Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 7:59 PM 
`To: Genevant Team <GenevantTeam@wc.com>; 'Arbutus_MoFo' <Arbutus_MoFo@mofo.com>; 
`*jshaw@shawkeller.com <jshaw@shawkeller.com>; Karen E. Keller (kkeller@shawkeller.com) 
`<kkeller@shawkeller.com>; Nate R. Hoeschen (nhoeschen@shawkeller.com) <nhoeschen@shawkeller.com>; Emily 
`DiBenedetto <edibenedetto@shawkeller.com> 
`Cc: #KEModernaSpikevaxService <KEModernaSpikevaxService@kirkland.com>; Jack Blumenfeld 
`(jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com) <jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com>; Egan, Brian P. <began@morrisnichols.com>; 
`Travis J. Murray (tmurray@morrisnichols.com) <tmurray@morrisnichols.com> 
`Subject: Arbutus v. Moderna (22‐252) // Supplemental Interrogatory Response 

`Counsel: 

`Attached please find: 

`
`  
`
` DEFENDANTS’ FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NO. 
`18) 
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00252-MSG Document 361-5 Filed 06/21/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 21801
`

`Best regards, 
`Yan‐Xin  

`Yan-Xin Li
`------------------------------------------------------------
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`555 California Street, San Francisco, CA 94104
`T +1 415 439 1618
`------------------------------------------------------------
`yanxin.li@kirkland.com  

`   
`The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only
`for the use of the addressee. It is the property of the multi-national law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP and/or its affiliated entities. Unauthorized use, disclosure
`or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
`notify us immediately by return email or by email to postmaster@kirkland.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all
`attachments.  


`

`This message and any attachments are intended only for the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and 
`confidential. If you have received this message in error, please do not read, use, copy, distribute, or disclose the contents of the 
`message and any attachments. Instead, please delete the message and any attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank 
`you.  
`   
`The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only
`for the use of the addressee. It is the property of the multi-national law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP and/or its affiliated entities. Unauthorized use, disclosure
`or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
`notify us immediately by return email or by email to postmaster@kirkland.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all
`attachments.  

`   
`The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only
`for the use of the addressee. It is the property of the multi-national law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP and/or its affiliated entities. Unauthorized use, disclosure
`or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
`notify us immediately by return email or by email to postmaster@kirkland.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all
`attachments.  

`
`5
`
`

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