Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 164 Filed 07/26/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 15146
`
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
`Professional Corporation
`222 Delaware Avenue,
`Suite 800
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`O: 302-304-7600
`F: 866.974.7329
`
`July 26, 2023
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC FILING
`
`IAN R. LISTON
`Internet: ILISTON@wsgr.com
`Direct dial: (302) 304-7606
`
`The Honorable William C. Bryson
`U.S. Court of Appeals, Fed. Cir.
`717 Madison Place, NW
`Washington, D.C. 220439
`
`Re:
`
`Impossible Foods Inc. v. Motif FoodWorks, Inc. and
`Ginkgo Bioworks, Inc., C.A. No. 22-311 (WCB)
`
`Dear Judge Bryson:
`
`We write on behalf of Plaintiff Impossible Foods Inc. and Defendant Motif FoodWorks,
`Inc., parties to the above-referenced action, pursuant to Paragraph 13(b) of the Scheduling Order
`(D.I. 37) to confirm that the parties met and conferred to discuss the disputed claim terms.1 The
`parties discussed the claim terms from the yeast strain patents,2 but intend to further meet and
`confer regarding those terms in accordance with the Court’s severance order and guidance during
`the July 24, 2023 telephone conference.
`
`On July 21, 2023, the parties conducted a telephonic meet and confer to discuss any
`possible agreement or further narrowing of the disputed claim terms. The following counsel
`were present on behalf of the parties:
`
`1 Counsel for Defendant Ginkgo Bioworks, Inc. attended but did not participate in the meet and
`confer as it did not participate in claim construction briefing. Accordingly, this joint status
`report is submitted on behalf of Impossible and Motif.
`2 Those claim terms are agreed term 1 (in Section I), disputed Plaintiff’s terms 18-20 & 26 (in
`Section II), and deferred Motif terms 12-17 (in Section III). (D.I. 94-1, Ex. A). The parties
`understand that the Court has deferred briefing and ruling on claim construction with respect to
`these terms and the yeast strain patents generally. See D.I. 161 at 2.
`
`AUSTIN BEIJING BOSTON BOULDER BRUSSELS HONG KONG LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PALO ALTO
`SALT LAKE CITY SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, DC WILMINGTON, DE
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 164 Filed 07/26/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 15147
`
`The Honorable William C. Bryson
`July 26, 2023
`Page 2
`
`Plaintiff Impossible Foods Inc.
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, PC
`Wendy L. Devine
`Matthew R. Reed
`Kristina M. Hanson
`Ian R. Liston
`Jessica Ramsey
`
`Defendant Motif FoodWorks, Inc.
`
`MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP
`Jeremy A. Tigan
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`Joseph M. Paunovich
`Razmig Messerian
`Sarah Cork
`Trevor J. Quist
`
`Defendant Ginkgo Bioworks, Inc.
`
`MORRISON & FOERSTER, LLP
`Vera Ranieri
`
`The parties discussed their respective positions on the disputed claim terms. The parties
`asked questions based on the claim construction briefing to determine if there was any basis for
`narrowing the disputes or finding a potential middle ground, but were ultimately unable to
`resolve or narrow the disputes. As such, the joint claim construction chart (D.I. 94-1, Ex. A)
`remains current as to the outstanding disputes regarding the food product patents.
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 164 Filed 07/26/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 15148
`
`The Honorable William C. Bryson
`July 26, 2023
`Page 3
`
`cc:
`
`All Counsel of Record (via CM-ECF)
`
`Respectfully,
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH &
`ROSATI, Professional Corporation
`
`/s/ Ian R. Liston
`Ian R. Liston (#5507)
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Impossible Foods, Inc.
`
`