Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 9324
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ROBOCAST, INC., a Delaware corporation
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`YOUTUBE, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
`company; and GOOGLE LLC, a Delaware limited
`liability company,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 22-0304-JLH
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`NOTICE OF DEPOSITION BY DEFENDANTS GOOGLE LLC AND YOUTUBE, LLC
`TO PLAINTIFF ROBOCAST, INC. PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 30(b)(6)
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure, Defendants Google LLC and YouTube, LLC (collectively, “Google” or “Defendants”),
`
`by and through their counsel, will take the deposition of Plaintiff Robocast, Inc. (“Robocast”) by
`
`one or more of its officers, directors, managing agents, or other person designated by Robocast
`
`who are most qualified, knowledgeable, and competent to testify on its behalf as to all matters
`
`known or reasonably available to Robocast with respect to the Topics identified in the attached
`
`Schedule A. Robocast is requested to identify each person so designated and to set forth the
`
`matters on which that person will testify at least five (5) days before the deposition.
`
`The deposition will commence on July 12, 2024, at 9:00 am ET, or on a date and at a time
`
`to be mutually agreed upon in writing by counsel for the parties, and take place at the law offices
`
`of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati at One Market Plaza, Suite 3300, San Francisco, California
`
`or at a location to be mutually agreed upon in writing by counsel for the parties. The deposition
`
`will be conducted under oath by an officer authorized to take such testimony and administer oaths,
`
`for use at trial and all other purposes permissible under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 9325
`
`
`
`Local Rules of the United States District Court of the District of Delaware. The deposition will
`
`continue from day to day, or may be continued to a future date or dates, until completed—with
`
`weekends and holidays excepted. This notice is served without waiver of the ability to serve
`
`additional notices to Robocast identifying additional topics of deposition.
`
`PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the deposition will be taken by oral examination
`
`and recorded by stenographic means and videotaped.
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Jordan R. Jaffe
`Amy H. Candido
`Catherine Lacey
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`One Market Plaza, Suite 330
`San Francisco, CA 94105-1126
`
`Neil Desai
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`953 E. 3rd St., Suite #100
`Los Angeles, CA 90013
`
`May 31, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Christine D. Haynes
`Frederick L. Cottrell, III (#2555)
`Christine D. Haynes (#4697)
`RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A.
`One Rodney Square
`920 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 651-7700
`cottrell@rlf.com
`haynes@rlf.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendants YouTube, LLC and
`Google LLC
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 9326
`
`
`
`SCHEDULE A
`
`Notwithstanding any definition set forth below, each word, term, or phrase used in this
`
`Notice of Deposition is intended to have the broadest meaning permitted under the Federal Rules
`
`of Civil Procedure.
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`1.
`
`“Robocast,” “Plaintiff,” “You,” and “Your” each means, individually and
`
`collectively, Robocast, Inc., its parent companies (including Interactive Media Universe LLC
`
`(“IMU”)), subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, affiliates, other related business entities, assigns,
`
`joint venturers, partners, principals, directors, officers, employees, attorneys, accountants,
`
`representatives, consultants, and all other persons or entities acting on behalf of Robocast, Inc.
`
`2.
`
`“Google,” “YouTube,” and “Defendants” each means Google LLC and/or
`
`YouTube, LLC.
`
`3.
`
`“Damon Torres” and “Mr. Torres” means Damon C. Torres, or any person acting
`
`on his behalf.
`
`4.
`
`References to this “lawsuit,” “case,” or “action” mean the above-captioned action
`
`brought by Robocast.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`"Netflix” means Netflix, Inc.
`
`The “Netflix Litigation” refers to Robocast’s litigation against Netflix.
`
`The “’451 Patent” means U.S. Patent No. 7,155,451.
`
`The “’819 Patent” means U.S. Patent No. 8,606,819.
`
`The “’932 Patent” means U.S. Patent No. 8,965,932.
`
`10.
`
`“Asserted Patents” means the ’451 Patent, the ’819 Patent, and the ’932 Patent,
`
`collectively.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 4 of 20 PageID #: 9327
`
`
`
`11.
`
`“Asserted Claims” means each claim of the Asserted Patents that Robocast asserts
`
`that Google infringes, either directly or indirectly, literally or by the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`The “’360 Application” means United States Application No. 60/250,360.
`
`The “’063 Application” means United States Application No. 08/922,063.
`
`The “’906 Application” means United States Application No. 09/144,906.
`
`The “’570 Application” means United States Application No. 13/449,570.
`
`The “’209 Application” means United States Application No. 11/316,209.
`
`The “Robocast Applications” means the ’360 Application, the ’063 Application,
`
`the ’906 Application, the ’570 Application, and/or the ’209 Application.
`
`18.
`
`“Related Patents or Applications” means (a) all divisional, continuation, and
`
`continuation-in-part applications of any of the applications from which any of the Asserted Patents
`
`issued, and any application that shares the same or substantially similar specification, or a portion
`
`thereof, as any of the Asserted Patents or claims priority to any of the applications in the chains of
`
`applications that led to the Asserted Patents; (b) all patents issuing from the applications described
`
`in (a); (c) all reissues, reexaminations, inter partes review, and any other post-grant proceedings
`
`before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) of each of the Asserted Patents or
`
`any of the patents described in (b); and (d) all foreign counterpart patent applications and foreign
`
`counterpart patents to any of the Asserted Patents or any of the patents or applications described
`
`in (a) or (b) above.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`The “Richardson Reference” means United States Patent No. 5,809,247.
`
`“USPTO” means the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
`
`“Prior Art” means the subject matter described in the applicable versions of 35
`
`U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, including but not limited to publications, patents, physical devices,
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 5 of 20 PageID #: 9328
`
`
`
`prototypes, uses, sales, and offers for sale, and any documents or other items evidencing any of
`
`the foregoing, taken singly or in combination, and having or occurring at a date such as to be
`
`potentially relevant under any subsection of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103.
`
`22.
`
`“Accused Functionalities” means the accused automated video playlists from
`
`March 7, 2016 until the alleged expiration of the patents-in-suit (no later than August 2020) as
`
`identified Plaintiff Robocast Inc.’s Disclosure Pursuant To Paragraph 4(a) of the Delaware Default
`
`Standard For Discovery at 1-2 (Mar. 3, 2023); Robocast Inc.’s Paragraph 4(c) Disclosure of Initial
`
`Claim Charts (May 20, 2024).
`
`23.
`
`“Robocast’s Beta Website” refers to any programs and/or applications available on
`
`http://beta.robocast.com/.
`
`24.
`
`“Robocast Products” means any product and/or service currently or previously
`
`made available or offered to the public by Robocast, including but not limited to “RoboCast” and
`
`its “suite of programs” including RoboSurf, Robosites, RoboGuide, RoboPublisher (see ’451
`
`Patent at 8:1-16); Robocast’s programs and/or applications including Robocaster and Robomobile;
`
`and Robocast’s Beta Website.
`
`25.
`
`“RoboShows” refers to the shows created or played through any of Robocast
`
`Products, as described in ROBOCAST011235 at ROBOCAST011299.
`
`26.
`
`“Robocast’s IP” means any rights or ownership (past, present, or future) Robocast
`
`or Damon Torres has in any patents, copyrights, or trademarks.
`
`27.
`
`“Robocast’s Stakeholders” means and includes any Person who has any stocks,
`
`investments, interests, and/or ownership in Robocast.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 6 of 20 PageID #: 9329
`
`
`
`28.
`
`The “Prior Litigations” means Robocast, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., C.A. No. 10-
`
`01055-RGA (D. Del.) and Robocast, Inc. v. Apple Inc., C.A. No. 11-00235-RGA (D. Del.), both
`
`independently and jointly.
`
`29.
`
`“Infringe,” “infringing,” “infringed,” and “infringement” each means any
`
`infringement alleged in Robocast’s infringement contentions.
`
`30.
`
`“Person” and “individual” each means any natural person or any business, legal, or
`
`government entity, or association—including, but not limited to, any proprietorship, partnership,
`
`firm, company, or corporation.
`
`31.
`
`“Third Party” and “Third Parties” each means and includes any person or persons
`
`other than Robocast or Google.
`
`32.
`
`“Employee” means director, trustee, officer, employee, partner, corporate parent,
`
`subsidiary, affiliate or servant of the designated entity, whether active or retired, full-time or part-
`
`time, current or former, and compensated or not.
`
`33.
`
`“Date” means the exact day, month, and year if so ascertainable or, if not, the best
`
`approximation (including relationship to seasons and/or other events).
`
`34.
`
`The terms “identify,” “identity,” and “identification” mean, as the context shall
`
`make appropriate:
`
`a.
`
`With respect to a person, the name, present or last known address, telephone
`
`number, occupation, and employer;
`
`b.
`
`With respect to a document, the type of document (e.g., letter,
`
`memorandum, book, etc.), date, author, general subject matter, the name of the company in the
`
`case of a corporate document, all persons designated on the document to receive a copy or
`
`otherwise known to have received a copy, the document’s present location, and the identity of the
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 9330
`
`
`
`custodian of the original and each copy. If any such document was, but no longer is, in Your
`
`possession, custody, or control, or if any document was in existence but is no longer in existence
`
`due to destruction or otherwise, state how the document was disposed, the date of such disposition,
`
`the identity of the person responsible for making the decision as to such disposition, and the person
`
`responsible for carrying out the disposition;
`
`c.
`
`With respect to a telephone conversation, the full name, occupation,
`
`telephone number and address of each party to the telephone conversation, the date of the
`
`conversation, and the subject matter discussed;
`
`d.
`
`With respect to an oral conversation other than a telephone conversation,
`
`the full name, occupation, telephone number, and address of each party to such conversation, the
`
`date of the conversation, and the subject matter discussed;
`
`e.
`
`With respect to a corporation, partnership, association, or other entity, its
`
`full name, form of organization, present or last known address, and telephone number; and
`
`f.
`
`With respect to any event or action, the dates or approximate dates thereof,
`
`a description of what occurred, and all persons involved.
`
`35.
`
`“Communicate” and “Communication” each means, without limitation, any
`
`manner or means of disclosure, transfer, transmission, conveyance, or exchange of information
`
`whether by written, oral, or other means (such as person-to-person, in a group, by telephone, letter
`
`facsimile, electronic or computer mail, voicemail, telex, telecopy, or any other process, electric,
`
`electronic or otherwise).
`
`36.
`
`“Document” has the meaning accorded by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a)
`
`including, but not limited to, all of the matters defined in Federal Rule of Evidence 1001. By way
`
`of illustration and without limitation, documents include at least the following: originals, drafts
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 8 of 20 PageID #: 9331
`
`
`
`and all non-identical copies of memoranda, reports, notes, emails, graphs, notebooks,
`
`correspondence, interoffice communications, letters, diaries, calendars, photographs, motion
`
`pictures, sketches, drawings, promotional material, technical papers, printed publications, patents,
`
`and all other writings, as well as all non-paper information storage means such as sound
`
`reproductions, computer inputs and outputs, tape, film and computer memory devices, as well as
`
`tangible things such as models, modules, prototypes, and commercially saleable products. If a
`
`draft document has been prepared in several copies that are not identical, or if the original identical
`
`copies are no longer identical due to subsequent notation, each non-identical document is a
`
`separate document. The foregoing specifically includes electronically stored information (“ESI”),
`
`including information stored in a computer database and capable of being generated in
`
`documentary form, such as electronic mail.
`
`37.
`
`38.
`
`“Thing” has the full meaning ascribed to it by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`“Concern,” “concerning,” “evidence,” “evidencing,” “relating to,” “relate to,”
`
`“relates to,” “related to,” “referring or relating to,” “referring to,” “regarding,” and “refer or relate
`
`to” are construed broadly to mean in whole or in part alluding to, responding to, concerning,
`
`relating to, connected with, involving, commenting on, in respect of, about, associated with,
`
`discussing, evidencing, showing, describing, reflecting, analyzing, summarizing, memorializing,
`
`consisting of, constituting, identifying, stating, tending to support, tending to discredit, referring
`
`to, or in any way touching upon.
`
`39.
`
`40.
`
`The singular of each word shall be construed to include its plural, and vice versa.
`
`The conjunctions “and” as well as “or” shall be construed either conjunctively or
`
`disjunctively, whichever is more inclusive in context.
`
`41.
`
`“Each” and “every” shall be construed to include “all” and “any,” and vice versa.
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 9 of 20 PageID #: 9332
`
`
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`The present tense shall be construed to include the past tense, and vice versa.
`
`Google’s use of terms, phrases, and definitions is for convenience and no term,
`
`phrase, or definition shall be construed as an admission by Google.
`
`INSTRUCTIONS
`
`1.
`
`If you find any meaning of any term in Google’s Topics for Examination unclear,
`
`then you shall construe the term to as to render responsive any information, Document, or Thing
`
`that might otherwise be rendered non-responsive.
`
`2.
`
`Google’s Topics for Examination seek all responsive information, Documents, and
`
`Things that are known or available to Robocast or within Robocast’s actual or legal possession,
`
`custody, or control.
`
`3.
`
`Google’s Topics for Examination seek information, Documents, and Things as of
`
`the date hereof and to the full extent allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including
`
`without limitation all responsive information, Documents and Things acquired or identified by
`
`Robocast up to and including the date(s) of testimony.
`
`4.
`
`If Robocast objects to any part of a Topic for Examination and refuses to answer it,
`
`then Robocast shall state Robocast’s complete objection and all bases thereof, and shall provide a
`
`complete answer to the remaining portion of that Topic for Examination.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 9333
`
`
`
`TOPICS FOR EXAMINATION
`
`1.
`
`The business, organizational, operational, and corporate structure of Robocast,
`
`including its employees and locations, parents, subsidiaries, affiliated entities, Robocast’s
`
`relationship with Nomad Multimedia, Inc., The I-Way Company, Inc., and IMU, and the
`
`distribution of any income, revenues, profits, or other payments between Robocast and other
`
`Persons.
`
`2.
`
`The ownership of Robocast and identity of Robocast’s Stakeholders, including the
`
`interest, shares, and equity contribution of each Robocast Stakeholder, and any underlying
`
`purchase agreements, promissory notes, or unit purchase warrants, including their terms and/or
`
`payment.
`
`3.
`
`The ownership of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, and any Related
`
`Patents or Applications, including all evidence, facts, and circumstances concerning any change
`
`in title, transfer, assignment, or acquisition of any of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications,
`
`or Related Patents or Applications.
`
`4.
`
`All financial nd pecuniary interests in the Asserted Patents or this action and their
`
`respective percent interests in any proceeds received in connection with this action.
`
`5.
`
`Any actual or contemplated litigation funding of this action or relating to any of the
`
`Asserted Patents or Related Patents, including the identity of any actual or contemplated litigation
`
`funders, and the terms of any actual or contemplated agreements with litigation funders.
`
`6.
`
`All facts and circumstances relating to Robocast’s attempts to secure funding,
`
`including a Series B round funding, including all communications for or with actual or prospective
`
`investors.
`
`7.
`
`All facts and circumstances relating to Robocast’s document retention policies, the
`
`systems, methods, and platforms used by Robocast for storing Documents and Things, and its
`8
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 9334
`
`
`
`efforts to locate Documents and Things produced in this action and Documents and Things
`
`produced, filed, served, or made available for inspection in the Prior Litigations, including the
`
`information and materials analyzed in the Expert Report of Mark Kirshner served on Robocast in
`
`the Prior Litigations. See ROBO-A2737565 at ROBO-A2737637–638, ROBO-A2737677–736
`
`(Exhibits B–D to Mr. Kirshner’s Report).
`
`8.
`
`The inventorship of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents
`
`or Applications, including Robocast’s motivations for developing the alleged invention(s).
`
`9.
`
`The research and development of the alleged invention(s) claimed in the Asserted
`
`Patents, Robocast Applications, and Related Patents and Applications, including all evidence,
`
`facts, and circumstances concerning their alleged conception and any alleged acts of diligence
`
`between conception and reduction to practice, attempts to reduce to practice, or actual reduction
`
`to practice of the alleged invention(s), all facts and circumstances concerning the loss and/or
`
`removal of any such evidence that is no longer in Robocast’s possession, custody, or control, and
`
`the amount of resources (monetary and otherwise) invested into the research and development of
`
`the alleged inventions.
`
`10.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances relating to the first offer for sale, first public
`
`use, first publication, and/or first disclosure to any Third Party of any subject matter allegedly
`
`covered, in whole or in part, by the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or
`
`Applications, including for the Asserted Claims.
`
`11.
`
`Robocast’s patent prosecution policies and practices, including without limitation:
`
`(i) policies and practices for documenting conception, reduction to practice, and diligence in
`
`reducing practice; (ii) policies and practices for identifying and disclosing information material to
`
`patentability to the USPTO; (iii) policies and practices regarding pursuit of continuation and
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 9335
`
`
`
`continuation-in-part applications; and (iv) the application of all such policies and practices to the
`
`Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications.
`
`12.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances concerning the prosecution of the Asserted
`
`Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications, including statements made,
`
`Prior Art disclosed and other events that took place during prosecution of the Asserted Patents,
`
`Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications, including the identity and roles of all
`
`Persons who have provided or are providing Robocast with advice regarding patent prosecution or
`
`communicating with Robocast regarding patent prosecution, and all evidence, facts, and
`
`circumstances concerning all Prior Art searches performed, Prior Art found, and knowledge of and
`
`the decision to disclose or not to disclose any Prior Art that was known to Robocast, Damon Torres,
`
`or others involved in prosecution of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related
`
`Patents or Applications.
`
`13.
`
`All Prior Art, or other Documents, Things, or events that anyone has ever suggested
`
`or stated are, or may be, Prior Art, identified by Robocast, Damon Torres, Netflix, Google, or any
`
`Third Party with regard to the Asserted Patents, the Robocast Applications, or any Related Patents
`
`or Applications (including Prior Art identified in Google’s invalidity contentions), and the timing
`
`and circumstances regarding Robocast’s knowledge or awareness of any such Prior Art.
`
`14.
`
`Facts and circumstances surrounding Robocast’s relationship with Polle T.
`
`Zellweger, including communications with Polle T. Zellweger.
`
`15.
`
`Applicant’s attempts to swear behind the Richardson Reference identified in the
`
`November 12, 1999 response to the May 14, 1999 Final Office Action filed during the prosecution
`
`of the ’063 Application, including all facts and circumstances concerning Damon Torres’s
`
`Declaration Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.131 submitted during the prosecution of the ’063 Application,
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 13 of 20 PageID #: 9336
`
`
`
`including all evidence tending to support or refute that declaration, and all facts and circumstances
`
`concerning the “searching” referenced in, e.g., ROBO0226542 and the “found . . . things”
`
`referenced in, e.g., ROBO0241620.
`
`16.
`
`The facts and circumstances surrounding the decision by Damon Torres and
`
`Robocast not to correct Mr. Torres’ declaration dated November 11, 1998 submitted during
`
`prosecution of Patent Application No. 08/922,063 or disclose to the USPTO that it was untrue,
`
`including after Mr. Torres admitted during prior depositions that statements in the declaration were
`
`untrue (see, e.g., 1/31/2013 Torres Dep. Tr. at 106:4-14), including the identity of all Persons
`
`involved in or knowledgeable about the decision, and documents and things relating to the
`
`decision.
`
`17.
`
`Communications between Jon Hertzig or John Halbert and Damon Torres or
`
`Robocast concerning the subject matter of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related
`
`Patents or Applications, Google or YouTube, this action, the Netflix Litigation, and the Prior
`
`Litigations.
`
`18.
`
`All facts and circumstances relating to the Second Amended Expert Report of
`
`Dr. Ellis Horowitz as served on Robocast in Robocast, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., C.A. No. 10-1055-
`
`RGA (D. Del.), the Expert Report of Dr. Daniel A. Menasce Regarding the Invalidity of U.S.
`
`Patent Nos. 7,155,451 B1 as served on Robocast in Robocast, Inc. v. Apple Inc., C.A. No. 11-235-
`
`RGA (D. Del.), the Expert Report of Mark Kirshner as served on Robocast in the Prior Litigations,
`
`and Robocast’s decision not to disclose each of these reports to the USPTO during prosecution of
`
`the ’819 and ’932 Patents.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 14 of 20 PageID #: 9337
`
`
`
`19.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances concerning any long-felt need, prior failure
`
`to invent, unexpected results, copying, contemporaneous independent invention, prior skepticism
`
`by experts, and praise for products covered by the Asserted Patents.
`
`20.
`
`Communications and information exchanged between Robocast (or anyone on its
`
`behalf) and any other Person relating to the validity, enforceability, scope, or infringement of any
`
`of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications, including any
`
`presentation or meeting (whether given to or by Robocast) relating to the validity, enforceability,
`
`scope, or infringement of any of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents
`
`or Applications.
`
`21.
`
`For each Asserted Claim, the date on which Robocast contends YouTube or
`
`Google’s infringement began and all evidence, facts, and circumstances that support or negate
`
`Robocast’s contention.
`
`22.
`
`For each Asserted Claim, all evidence, facts, and circumstances that support or
`
`negate Robocast’s position that YouTube and Google have committed any act of direct or indirect
`
`infringement in the United States (e.g., U.S. sale or offer for sale), including the factual bases
`
`underlying Robocast’s contentions identified pursuant to D.I. 47 ¶ 3.6.i(c) and iii.
`
`23.
`
`The factual bases for the allegations contained within Robocast’s complaint, see
`
`D.I. 1, including that the “inventions claimed in the Patents-in-Suit are directed to providing a
`
`specific and unconventional technological solution, necessarily rooted in computer technology, to
`
`a known technological problem that existed with respect to Internet web browsing as it was then
`
`being practiced by computer users in the early 1990s time frame” (id. ¶ 13); that “YouTube has
`
`operated its video hosting Internet platform . . . in an infringing manner that practices method
`
`claims of the Patents-in-Suit” (id. ¶ 25); and Robocast’s alleged entitlement to damages, treble or
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 15 of 20 PageID #: 9338
`
`
`
`otherwise enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, costs and
`
`expenses, and “any further relief to Robocast that the Court deems just and proper.”
`
`24.
`
`All facts and circumstances concerning when and how Robocast first became aware
`
`of YouTube or the Accused Functionalities, including but not limited to Robocast’s knowledge of
`
`Google and YouTube as a company generally or any of their products and when Robocast first
`
`formed an opinion that the Accused Functionalities allegedly infringed any Asserted Patent.
`
`25.
`
`All facts and circumstances surrounding any studies, examination, reverse
`
`engineering, reports or opinions performed or commissioned by Robocast with respect to the
`
`Accused Functionalities.
`
`26.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances relating to the decision to bring this action
`
`against YouTube and Google, including all evidence, facts, and circumstances concerning
`
`Robocast’s investigation, if any, conducted before filing a complaint asserting patent infringement
`
`by YouTube and Google.
`
`27.
`
`The timing of Robocast’s filing of this action, including all evidence, facts, and
`
`circumstances concerning any reasons for not filing suit prior to March 7, 2022 and tending to
`
`support or refute any contention by Robocast that the timing of this action did not prejudice or
`
`otherwise harm YouTube or Google.
`
`28.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances relating to any alleged notice to YouTube or
`
`Google or decision to not provide notice to YouTube or Google of its alleged infringement of any
`
`Asserted Patents before filing the complaint in this action or any offers to license.
`
`29.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances relating to the type or nature of any harm
`
`and/or amount of damages allegedly caused by Google to Robocast, including all facts and
`
`circumstances relating to Robocast’s efforts to value the Accused Functionalities, including but
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 16 of 20 PageID #: 9339
`
`
`
`not limited to any valuation analyses or studies created by or for Robocast concerning the Accused
`
`Functionalities, and any assessment of whether any Robocast Product competes with any YouTube
`
`or Google product for customers, sales, or revenue.
`
`30.
`
`Communications between Robocast and any Third Party concerning this action,
`
`YouTube, Google, or any YouTube or Google products, including the Accused Functionalities and
`
`including all facts and circumstances concerning any Communications between Robocast (or
`
`anyone on its behalf) and any former employees of YouTube or Google.
`
`31.
`
`All facts and circumstances relating to Robocast’s knowledge of any product or
`
`service by a Third Party that automatically displays content corresponding to each of a plurality of
`
`resources or automatically plays content in a sequence, and any evaluation or investigation of such
`
`products or services.
`
`32.
`
`Robocast’s attempts to commercialize the Robocast Products, including the number
`
`of units, uses, and/or licenses sold, and how much revenue and profit, if any, Robocast made by
`
`making, offering for sale, selling, importing, or licensing on a per unit and overall and periodic
`
`basis (e.g., monthly, quarterly, annually).
`
`33.
`
`Facts and circumstances relating to documents and communications to prospective
`
`or actual customers explaining how to use any Robocast Product.
`
`34.
`
`Robocast’s past and projected financials, including sources of income and
`
`operating expenses reflected on its balance sheets, and revenue information relating to Robocast
`
`Products, including sales, costs, profits (net and gross), and profit margins.
`
`35.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances relating to any studies, analyses, evaluations,
`
`opinions, and Communications with Third Parties concerning any past, present, or potential
`
`valuation of Robocast, Robocast Products, Robocast’s IP, the Asserted Patents, Robocast
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 17 of 20 PageID #: 9340
`
`
`
`Applications, Related Patents or Applications, and/or any alleged invention(s) claimed in
`
`Robocast’s IP.
`
`36.
`
`All evidence, facts, and circumstances concerning Robocast’s or Damon Torres’
`
`efforts to license, commercialize, or otherwise monetize Robocast’s IP, the Asserted Patents,
`
`Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications, including but not limited to the identity
`
`of actual or proposed licensees, the identity of actual or proposed licenses, and the subject of any
`
`offer to license.
`
`37.
`
`Robocast’s patent enforcement policies and practices, including all evidence, facts,
`
`and circumstances relating to any pending, former, or potential efforts by Robocast outside of this
`
`action to enforce the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related Patents or Applications,
`
`and identification of any potential or actual licensees and litigation targets, the timing of any
`
`anticipated litigation, and the costs and funding of such efforts, as well as all facts and
`
`circumstances by which enforcement of the Asserted Patents, Robocast Applications, or Related
`
`Patents or Applications were made a part of Robocast’s business strategy, and Communications
`
`regarding the same. See Dec. 20, 2022 Tr. 33:6-10, 18-21, Robocast, Inc. v. YouTube, LLC, C.A.
`
`No. 22-304-JHL (D. Del.) (Robocast stating that “litigation” is “a big piece of” what Robocast is
`
`“up to.”).
`
`38.
`
`All efforts or offers to license and actual license agreements, settlement agreements,
`
`covenants not to sue and/or other agreements relating to Robocast’s IP, Asserted Patents, Robocast
`
`Applications, or Related Patents or Applications, including Robocast’s agreements with Microsoft,
`
`Vevo, and Apple, and all evidence, facts, circumstances, and Communications relating to their
`
`negotiation and terms of such agreements, including the identity of all licensees, any and all
`
`licensed products, the licensed patents and applications, the geographic scope, the duration of the
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00304-JLH Document 193 Filed 05/31/24 Page 18 of 20 PageID #: 9341
`
`
`
`license, the structure for such agreements, the amounts and royalty rates Robocast has either
`
`offered or accepted for such agreements, the forms and amounts of royalty payments received, and
`
`the methods used to determine any royalties and royalty rates.
`
`39.
`
`Any Documents or Things that have been identified by Damon Torres, Robocast,
`
`Apple, Microsoft, Netflix, or any Third Party as compr