throbber
Case 1:19-cv-11278-RGS Document 45-4 Filed 02/20/20 Page 1 of 2
`
`trXHIBIT C
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11278-RGS Document 45-4 Filed 02/20/20 Page 2 of 2
`
`Foster, James J.
`
`From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`
`Jim,
`
`I write on behalf of Defendants.
`
`Chassman, Peter J. < PChassman@ReedSmith.com>
`Tuesday, January 21,2020 1:38 PM
`Foster, James J.; 'Steven Katz'; amartin@burnslev.com; Forbes, Michael J.; James Sebel
`Ercolini, Michael; Tollefson, Brian A.; uniloc; Gillis, Maria
`RE: Uniloc v. Paychex (1:L9-cv-L1-272-RGS): 2019-12-12 Uniloc Disclosure of claim terms
`-Paychex
`
`We disagree that there is any limitation on the number of indefiniteness issues that Defendants may present to the
`Court. lt simply makes sense to do so at the same time as claim construction, which this Court has done in the past. All
`of the indefiniteness contentions that we intend to raise with the Court were included in our invalidity contentions,
`served months ago, although we do not intend to pursue all of them. Here is a summary of what we intend to brief on
`indefiniteness:
`
`Claims 20,22,24,35,37 and 39-40 of the'578 patent are invalid as indefinite, because the Eastern District of
`Texas found that to be the case and Uniloc did not appeal, and, therefore, offensive collateral bars Uniloc from
`arguing otherwise.
`Although the Eastern District of Texas did not address the indefiniteness of claims 9,23,25, and 40 of the '578
`patent in the case referenced above, these claims are invalid as indefinite on the same bases as the list above.
`Claims t6-46 of the '578 patent and claims L2,14,17 and '19 of the '293 patent are indefinite because they
`contain computer implemented "mean-plus-function" terms for which the specification does not disclose an
`algorithm as required corresponding structure. Defendants brief will focus on five exemplary terms from those
`claims:
`o "means for installing...to the network" ('578)
`o "means for distributing...to the network" ('5781
`o "means for providing an instance...plurality of authorized users" ('578)
`o "means for specifying a source directory and a target directory for distribution of the application
`program" ('293)
`o "means for distributing the file packet to the target on-demand server to make the application program
`available for use by a user at a client" ('293)
`
`a
`
`a a
`
`During the meet and confer process, Defendants specifically asked Uniloc to identify the corresponding structure for the
`means plus function terms, and you stated that Uniloc would not do so. Thus, we plan to serve our opening brief
`without Uniloc's positions in hand.
`
`Regards,
`Pete
`
`Peter J. Chassman
`Reed Smith t-t-p
`Suite 1700
`811 Main Street
`Houston, TX77002-6110
`pchassman@reedsm ith. com
`+1 713 469-3885
`+1 713 702-8213 (cell)
`
`1
`
`

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