EXHIBIT 2008
`EXHIBIT 2008
`
`

`
`Lauren Van Winkle
`
`From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`
`Justin Nemunaitis <jnemunaitis@McKoolSmith.com>
`Monday, December 09, 2013 3:15 PM
`Morgan, Christine
`Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`Chris,
`
`Just so I am clear on your position, Acer has withheld documents from production in the Ericsson v. D-Link case based on
`its position that a privilege exists that protects communications between Acer and Broadcom, but you are unwilling to
`provide us with privilege log-type descriptions of those communications or otherwise explain the basis for the privilege
`claim.
`
`If I have any of that wrong, please let me know.
`
`
`Thanks,
`Justin
`
`
`From: Morgan, Christine [mailto:CMorgan@ReedSmith.com]
`Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:46 PM
`To: Justin Nemunaitis
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Dear Justin – Even assuming there were some obligation to provide a privilege log after the case has been closed, which
`we do not believe there is, the protective order explicitly states at paragraph 21 that parties need not log any protected
`communications after the filing date of September 14, 2010. These documents are dated over one year after September
`2010, and therefore no log is required for them.
`
`In addition, we disagree that Ericsson is given free rein to review documents produced in the litigation at this stage, long
`after trial ended. You have not offered any purpose in the litigation between the parties for which you would be
`reviewing documents. Instead, the only thing you have done is stated Ericsson’s intent to seek relief to share the
`documents with counsel (who was not counsel in the litigation between the parties) and the PTO in the Broadcom IPR
`proceedings.
`
`
`Regards - Chris
`
`
`Christine M. Morgan
`cmorgan@reedsmith.com
`+1 415-659-5970
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
`T: +1 415 543 8700
`F: +1 415 391 8269
`reedsmith.com
`From: Justin Nemunaitis [mailto:jnemunaitis@McKoolSmith.com]
`Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 4:03 PM
`To: Morgan, Christine
`
`1
`
`

`
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Chris,
`
`
`We are in the process of complying with your request. Please provide us with privilege log information for those bates
`numbers that identifies all of the recipients of the communication and that provides the basis for your privilege claim. If
`you are claiming a common interest privilege, please clarify the parties to the privilege, when it was formed, and
`describe the common interest.
`
`
`As to your other point, there is nothing in the protective order that precludes us from reviewing documents produced in
`the litigation after trial.
`
`
`Regards,
`Justin
`
`
`From: Morgan, Christine [mailto:CMorgan@ReedSmith.com]
`Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 11:44 AM
`To: Justin Nemunaitis
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`Justin –
`
`
`These documents are privileged and were inadvertently produced during email discovery. Pursuant to the Protective
`Order’s obligations, please destroy all copies immediately, and confirm to us that all copies have been destroyed.
`
`
`Separately, we are concerned about Ericsson’s apparent ongoing search and review of documents in the Ericsson v. D-
`Link case. Paragraph 12 of the Protective Order mandates that designated information may only be used for purposes of
`litigation between the parties. As you know, fact discovery and trial in the Ericsson v. D-Link case concluded long ago,
`and therefore, we see no legitimate purpose under the Protective Order for Ericsson to be engaging in such activities at
`this stage.
`
`
`Christine M. Morgan
`cmorgan@reedsmith.com
`+1 415-659-5970
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
`T: +1 415 543 8700
`F: +1 415 391 8269
`reedsmith.com
`From: Justin Nemunaitis [mailto:jnemunaitis@McKoolSmith.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 10:02 AM
`To: Morgan, Christine
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Chris,
`
`
`Please let me know by COB tomorrow whether Acer will oppose the motion.
`
`
`Thanks,
`
`2
`
`

`
`Justin
`
`
`From: Justin Nemunaitis
`Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 5:24 PM
`To: 'Morgan, Christine'
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Chris,
`
`
`Ericsson intends to file a motion with the Court seeking relief from the protective order regarding the following
`documents:
`ACER-GATEWAY00110269
`ACER-GATEWAY00109581
`
`
`Specifically, Ericsson intends to seek relief from paragraphs 2, 8, and 12 so that Ericsson may provide copies of those
`documents to its IPR counsel Peter Ayers of Lee & Hayes and so that it may file these documents under seal with the
`PTO.
`
`
`To be clear, we are not seeking to de-designate these documents or share them with any in-house counsel at Ericsson.
`Nor are we seeking to share any other confidential, AEO, or source code documents with either Lee & Hayes or the PTO.
`Rather, Ericsson only seeks to share the specific documents identified in this email with its outside IPR counsel and with
`the PTO in a sealed filing.
`
`
`Ericsson intends to file this motion as an emergency motion and request expedited briefing. With Thanksgiving coming
`up I don’t expect any response to this email this week, but please let me know by early next week if Defendants will
`oppose the motion or the request for expedited briefing.
`
`
`Thanks,
`Justin
`
`
`
`From: Morgan, Christine [mailto:CMorgan@ReedSmith.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:55 PM
`To: Justin Nemunaitis
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`Justin – as far as we understand it, the IPR is a proceeding initiated by Broadcom to which our clients are not parties.
`We do not believe our clients are under any obligation to respond to your request or engage in any further dialogue
`about it. On behalf of our clients, we reserve all rights. Best - Chris
`
`
`Christine M. Morgan
`cmorgan@reedsmith.com
`+1 415-659-5970
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
`T: +1 415 543 8700
`F: +1 415 391 8269
`reedsmith.com
`From: Justin Nemunaitis [mailto:jnemunaitis@McKoolSmith.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:35 PM
`To: Morgan, Christine
`
`3
`
`

`
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Chris,
`
`
`Does that mean that your clients are unwilling to provide this information due to the lack of a formal discovery request?
`
`
`Do your clients have any other objections to providing this information if, for example, a suitable protective order is
`obtained in the IPR?
`
`
`Regards,
`Justin
`
`
`From: Morgan, Christine [mailto:CMorgan@ReedSmith.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 3:44 PM
`To: Justin Nemunaitis
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link; Mitchell, Jonah
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`Justin: This appears to be a request that should be directed to Broadcom in connection with the IPR proceeding, not to
`our clients, who are third parties. Best - Chris
`
`
`Christine M. Morgan
`cmorgan@reedsmith.com
`+1 415-659-5970
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
`T: +1 415 543 8700
`F: +1 415 391 8269
`reedsmith.com
`From: Justin Nemunaitis [mailto:jnemunaitis@McKoolSmith.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:31 PM
`To: Morgan, Christine
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Counsel,
`
`
`Following up on my email below, please let me know if Defendants will be providing the requested information in a form
`that may be shared with the PTAB and with Ericsson’s IPR counsel.
`
`
`Regards,
`Justin
`
`
`From: Justin Nemunaitis
`Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 4:15 PM
`To: Morgan, Christine (CMorgan@ReedSmith.com); ToshibaDefendants-Ericsson@foley.com; Dell-Ericsson@alston.com
`(Alston) (Dell-Ericsson@alston.com)
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Counsel,
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Following up on my email below, please let me know if Defendants will be providing the requested information in a form
`that may be shared with the PTAB and with Ericsson’s IPR counsel.
`
`
`Thanks,
`Justin
`
`
`From: Justin Nemunaitis
`Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 4:38 PM
`To: Morgan, Christine (CMorgan@ReedSmith.com); ToshibaDefendants-Ericsson@foley.com; Dell-Ericsson@alston.com
`(Alston) (Dell-Ericsson@alston.com)
`Cc: Ericsson_D-Link
`Subject: RE: Ericsson v. D-Link - Broadcom IPR
`
`
`Dear Counsel,
`
`I write in regard to Broadcom’s petitions for inter partes review of the patents found infringed in Ericsson v. D-Link.
`Ericsson believes that those petitions should be barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because at least one of the defendants
`in this case is the privy of Broadcom. To assist the PTAB in evaluating that issue, we request that Defendants allow the
`PTAB access to relevant documents. Specifically, Ericsson requests that Defendants provide non-confidential versions of
`the documents below that can be shared with the PTAB and with Ericsson’s IPR counsel:
`
`
`• All indemnity agreements between Defendants and Broadcom related to the products at issue in the lawsuit.
`
`• All joint defense agreements related to Ericsson v. D-Link signed by Broadcom and any of the defendants in
`this case.
`
`
`If Defendants will not agree to Ericsson’s requests, please let me know why.
`
`
`Thanks,
`Justin
`
`
`
`Justin Nemunaitis | McKool Smith
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500, Dallas, Texas 75201
`tel: 214.978.4213 fax: 214.978.4044
`
`
`NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
`
`
`
`The information contained in and transmitted with this e-mail is SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT and ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGE and is
`CONFIDENTIAL. It is intended only for the individual or entity designated above. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, use or
`reliance upon the information contained in and transmitted with this e-mail by or to anyone other than the addressee designated above by the sender is
`unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply immediately. Any e-mail erroneously transmitted to
`you should be immediately destroyed.
`
`
`
`* * *
`
`This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have
`received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this
`message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person.
`Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`* * *
`
`To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing,
`any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be
`
`5
`
`

`
`used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state
`and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed
`herein.
`
`Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
`
`6