PAGE 7 CONTAINS HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL – SUBJECT TO
`PROTECTIVE ORDER
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`STEUBEN FOODS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`GEA PROCESS ENGINEERING, INC.
`d/b/a GEA PROCOMAC and GEA
`PROCOMAC S.p.A.,
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 12-cv-00904-WMS-JJM
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:::::::::::
`
`
`GEA PROCOMAC S.p.A.’s OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO STEUBEN FOOD,
`INC.’S FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
`
`Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, GEA Procomac
`
`S.p.A. (“Procomac”) responds as follows to Plaintiff Steuben Foods, Inc.’s (“Steuben”) Fourth
`
`Set of Interrogatories to Defendants.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`The following general objections are incorporated into the responses to each of the
`
`interrogatories set forth below.
`
`1.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests (including the definitions and
`
`instructions) to the extent that they are unduly burdensome, overly broad, and call for
`
`information neither relevant to any claims or defenses of any party in this action nor reasonably
`
`calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`2.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent that they seek
`
`discovery of information subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product
`
`immunity, or both, as well as any other applicable privilege.
`
`3.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent that they seek
`
`publicly available information that is equally accessible to Steuben and to Procomac.
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`GEA Process Engineering, Inc. Exhibit 1059
`GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc.
` IPR2014-00041, -43, -51, -54, -55
`
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`STEUBEN FOODS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`GEA PROCESS ENGINEERING, INC.
`d/b/a GEA PROCOMAC and GEA
`PROCOMAC S.p.A.,
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 12-cv-00904-WMS-JJM
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:::::::::::
`
`
`GEA PROCOMAC S.p.A.’s OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO STEUBEN FOOD,
`INC.’S FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
`
`Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, GEA Procomac
`
`S.p.A. (“Procomac”) responds as follows to Plaintiff Steuben Foods, Inc.’s (“Steuben”) Fourth
`
`Set of Interrogatories to Defendants.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`The following general objections are incorporated into the responses to each of the
`
`interrogatories set forth below.
`
`1.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests (including the definitions and
`
`instructions) to the extent that they are unduly burdensome, overly broad, and call for
`
`information neither relevant to any claims or defenses of any party in this action nor reasonably
`
`calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`2.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent that they seek
`
`discovery of information subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product
`
`immunity, or both, as well as any other applicable privilege.
`
`3.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent that they seek
`
`publicly available information that is equally accessible to Steuben and to Procomac.
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`GEA Process Engineering, Inc. Exhibit 1059
`GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc.
` IPR2014-00041, -43, -51, -54, -55
`
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent that Steuben seeks
`
`to require Procomac to provide any information beyond what is available to Procomac at present
`
`from a reasonable search of its own files and reasonable inquiry of its employees.
`
`5.
`
`Procomac’s responses to these discovery requests are made without waiving or
`
`intending to waive any objections as to relevancy, privilege, or admissibility of any information
`
`provided therein in any subsequent proceeding or at the trial of this or any other action, on any
`
`ground. A partial answer to any discovery request that has been objected to, in whole or in part,
`
`is not intended as a waiver of the objection.
`
`6.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s use of subjective and/or undefined, vague, and
`
`ambiguous terms throughout its requests because such terms are difficult, if not impossible, to
`
`quantify or understand.
`
`7.
`
`Procomac objects to the discovery requests to the extent that they call for the
`
`confidential information of third-parties that cannot be disclosed because of contractual
`
`obligation or court order, or because the disclosure of such documents or information is
`
`precluded by law or regulation.
`
`8.
`
`Procomac objects to Steuben’s discovery requests to the extent they seek
`
`production of discovery beyond the scope of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.
`
`9.
`
`Because discovery is ongoing, Procomac expressly reserves the right to
`
`supplement or amend its responses to these requests as discovery proceeds.
`
`10.
`
`By answering any of the below interrogatories, Procomac does not admit the
`
`competence, relevance, materiality, or admissibility of such information or the information
`
`contained therein, and specifically reserves its rights to object to the use of such information on
`
`any grounds, including irrelevance and/or inadmissibility. Procomac’s responses are made
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`
`
`subject to and without waiving any objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, or
`
`admissibility.
`
`11.
`
`Procomac objects to the discovery requests to the extent that they seek “all”
`
`information or documents that refer to or relate to a particular subject because responding
`
`completely would require Procomac to seek information or documents from each individual
`
`within Procomac and to look at every single piece of paper in Procomac’s possession, custody or
`
`control. Procomac objects to conducting a search of this breadth on the grounds of undue burden
`
`and expense and not being reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`In searching for pertinent information and documents, Procomac will make inquiry of persons
`
`who are reasonably likely to have such information or documents and of other people identified
`
`by those people of whom Steuben have made such inquiry and will search for documents in
`
`locations where responsive documents will likely be found.
`
`In addition to these general objections, Procomac has further specific objections as set
`
`forth below. Each of the responses below includes these general objections.
`
`OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC INTERROGATORIES
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
`
`Identify with particularity each individual that participated in the preparation of any Petition
`
`filed in the IPR Proceedings, including by identifying each individual’s: (a) name; (b) title; (c)
`
`employer; (d) role played in preparing any Petitions; and (e) the nature of any input provided in
`
`connection with the preparation of any Petitions.
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory for including numerous separate subparts, which
`
`result in far more than one interrogatory.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory because the term “participated in the preparation”
`
`is vague and ambiguous.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory (including the definitions and instructions) to the
`
`extent that it is unduly burdensome, overly broad, and calls for information neither relevant to
`
`any claims or defenses of any party in this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
`
`discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory to the extent that Steuben seeks to require
`
`Procomac to provide any information beyond what is available to Procomac at present from a
`
`reasonable search of its own files and reasonable inquiry of its employees.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks discovery beyond the scope
`
`of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`By answering this interrogatory, Procomac does not admit the competence, relevance,
`
`materiality, or admissibility of the referenced information or the information contained therein,
`
`and specifically reserves its rights to object to the use of such information on any grounds,
`
`including irrelevance and/or inadmissibility. Procomac’s response is made subject to and
`
`without waiving any objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, or admissibility.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory because it seeks discovery of information subject
`
`to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product immunity, and/or any other applicable
`
`privilege. This interrogatory is directed at the very heart of privileged and protected information
`
`(e.g., the names of all attorney(s) that were involved in the preparation of the petitions, the
`
`
`
`4
`
`Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
`number of attorney(s) involved in the preparation of the petitions, the substantive input provided
`
`by the attorney(s)). Such information will not be disclosed.
`
`To the extent this interrogatory is understood and subject to the above general and
`
`specific objections, Procomac responds as follows.
`
`Procomac had no control over the IPR petitions and accompanying exhibits filed and
`
`served on Steuben on October 9 and 10, 2013 in IPR2014-00041, -43, -51, -54, -55, and -56
`
`(“IPR Petitions”), and did not participate in preparing or filing the IPR Petitions.
`
`Procomac reserves the right to supplement or update this response.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
`
`
`
`Identify with particularity each entity that participated, or that has agreed to participate, in
`
`whole, or in part, directly or indirectly, in the funding of any Petition filed in the IPR
`
`Proceedings, including by identifying any entity that participated, or that has agreed to
`
`participate, in whole, or in part, in the payment for legal services rendered in connection with
`
`any Petition or IPR Proceeding, as well as the payment of the government filing fees associated
`
`with the filing of the Petitions in the IPR Proceedings, or that reimbursed, or that has agreed to
`
`reimburse, in whole or in part, any such legal fees or filing fees paid or funded by any other
`
`entity.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory for including numerous separate subparts, which
`
`result in far more than one interrogatory.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory (including the definitions and instructions) to the
`
`extent that they are unduly burdensome, overly broad, and call for information neither relevant to
`
`any claims or defenses of any party in this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
`
`discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`
`
`5
`
`Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory because the terms “participated,” “participate,”
`
`"directly," and "indirectly" are vague and ambiguous.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory to the extent that Steuben seeks to require
`
`Procomac to provide any information beyond what is available to Procomac at present from a
`
`reasonable search of its own files and reasonable inquiry of its employees.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks discovery beyond the scope
`
`of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`By answering this interrogatory, Procomac does not admit the competence, relevance,
`
`materiality, or admissibility of the referenced information or the information contained therein,
`
`and specifically reserves its rights to object to the use of such information on any grounds,
`
`including irrelevance and/or inadmissibility. Procomac’s response is made subject to and
`
`without waiving any objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, or admissibility.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory because it seeks discovery of information subject
`
`to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product immunity, and/or any other applicable
`
`privilege. Such information will not be disclosed.
`
`Procomac objects to this interrogatory as vague and ambiguous as to timeframe.
`
`To the extent this interrogatory is understood and subject to the above general and
`
`specific objections, Procomac responds as follows:
`
`Procomac did not retain Pillsbury in connection with the IPR Petitions. As of the
`
`October 9-10, 2013 filing dates of the IPR Petitions, Procomac had not paid for, agreed to pay
`
`for, or been invoiced for, either directly or indirectly: (1) the IPR Petitions, (2) legal services
`
`rendered in connection with the IPR Petitions, or (3) the government filing fees associated with
`
`the filing of the IPR Petitions.
`
`
`
`6
`
`Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`Procomac reserves the right to supplement or update this response.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: May 19, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/s/ William P. Atkins
`William P. Atkins (*pro hac vice)
`william.atkins@pillsburylaw.com
`Benjamin L. Kiersz (*pro hac vice)
`benjamin.kiersz@pillsburylaw.com
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN
`LLP
`1650 Tysons Boulevard, Suite 1400
`McLean, VA 22102
`Telephone: (703) 770-7900
`Facsimile: (703) 770-7901
`
`Michael A. Brady
`Hagerty & Brady
`69 Delaware Ave., Suite 1010
`Buffalo, NY 14202
`(716)856-9443 (phone)
`(716)856-0511 (fax)
`mbrady@hagerty-brady.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT GEA
`PROCOMAC S.p.A.
`
`7
`
`Page 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that, on May 19, 2014, true and correct copies of GEA
`
`PROCOMAC S.p.A.’s OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO STEUBEN FOOD, INC.’S
`FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES are being served upon counsel of record in the
`following manner, addressed as follows:
`
`By Email and First Class Mail
`
`Joseph L. Stanganelli
`HISCOCK & BARCLAY LLP
`One International Place
`26th Floor
`Boston, MA 02110
`JStanganelli@hblaw.com
`
`Christopher E. Blank
`Thomas B. Cronmiller
`HISCOCK & BARCLAY LLP
`2000 HSBC Plaza
`100 Chestnut Street
`Rochester, NY 14604
`CBlank@hblaw.com
`TCronmiller@hblaw.com
`
`Thomas J. Fisher
`OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND, MAIER &
`NEUSTADT, LLP
`1940 Duke Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`TFisher@oblon.com
`
`M. Eric Galvez
`HISCOCK & BARCLAY LLP
`One Park Place
`300 South State Street
`P.O. Box 4878
`Syracuse, NY 13221
`MGalvez@hblaw.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`STEUBEN FOODS, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`/s/ William P. Atkins
`William P. Atkins
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`Page 8
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
