throbber
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`
`A R E G I S T E R E D L I M I T E D L I A B I L I T Y P A R T N E R S H I P
`
`
`
`S U I T E 5 1 0 0
`
`1 0 0 0 L O U I S I A N A S T R E E T
`
`HOU S TON , T E X AS 7 7 0 0 2 - 5 0 9 6
`
`(713) 651-9366
`
`FAX (713) 654-6666
`
`www.susmangodfrey.com
`
`__________
`
`
`
`Suite 5100
`
`Suite 950
`
`Suite 3800
`
`15th Floor
`
`901 Main Street
`
`1901 Avenue of the Stars
`
`1201 Third Avenue
`
`560 Lexington Avenue
`
`Dallas, Texas 75202-3775
`
`Los Angeles, California 90067-6029
`
`Seattle, Washington 98101-3000
`
`New York, New York 10022-6828
`
`(214) 754-1900
`
`__________
`
`(310) 789-3100
`
`__________
`
`(206) 516-3880
`
`__________
`
`(212) 336-8330
`
`__________
`
`E-Mail RCaughey@susmangodfrey.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Ryan Caughey
`
`Direct Dial (713) 653-7823
`
`
`
`
`November 13, 2014
`
`VIA E-MAIL
`
`Gene W. Lee
`Ropes & Gray LLP
`1211 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036-8704
`
`Re: Worlds Inc. v. Activision Blizzard et al.
`
`Dear Gene:
`
`We are writing to follow up on our call from Monday, to address two issues we have
`not closed the loop on: accused products and email discovery.
`
`
`1. Accused Products
`
`
`On our call, you explained that Defendants are unwilling to go forward with technical
`30(b)(6) depositions or, subject to further investigation, complete their document pro-
`duction until Defendants know whether Worlds intends to add additional accused
`products to the lawsuit.
`
`Worlds does intend to add Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Destiny, and World of
`Warcraft: Warlords of Draenor to the lawsuit. Worlds also reserves the right to add
`any future titles to this lawsuit, to the extent Defendants release additional infringing
`titles. Will Defendants stipulate that Advanced Warfare and Destiny operate materially
`the same as recent Call of Duty titles, and that Warlords of Draenor, which we under-
`stand to be simply an expansion pack, operates materially the same as World of
`Warcraft?
`
`
`3415740v2/013049
`
`Exhibit 2004
`Page 1 of 3
`
`

`
`
`
`November 13, 2014
`Page 2
`
`
`
`If Defendants will not stipulate, Worlds requests that Defendants promptly make the
`source code available for inspection for those three titles. Then, Worlds will agree to
`serve preliminary infringement contentions within 45 days of reviewing the source
`code. At that point, the titles would be accused products in this case, and the parties
`could progress with discovery into those titles and 30(b)(6) depositions. This was the
`procedure we used for Call of Duty: Ghosts. Please let us know if you agree.
`
`
`2. Email Discovery
`
`
`We also still need to address email discovery. I want to clarify our request on this is-
`sue. The e-discovery order provides for five custodians per party. Therefore, please
`identify 4 custodians from each of the 3 defendants (Activision Blizzard, Inc., Ac-
`tivision Publishing, Inc., and Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.) most likely to have sent
`and received email messages and documents relevant to the accused products. We will
`reserve one custodian for each of the three companies. For Activision Publishing, Inc.
`and Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., we request that Activision identify two technical
`employees and two marketing employees who are most likely to have sent and re-
`ceived the greatest number of email messages and documents relating to the accused
`products. For Activision Blizzard, we request that you identify the four employees
`most likely to have sent and received email messages and documents relevant to the
`accused products, irrespective of their position.
`
`
`As we explained in our letter of October 28, on November 21, 2013, in connection
`with correspondence on this issue, Mr. Greene asked Worlds for a list of proposed
`search terms pursuant to the e-discovery order. Mr. Greene explained, “[w]e will not
`bind you to the terms that you provide at this time, it would just be helpful for us to
`make sure that we identify the right custodians.” For the technical employees, we an-
`ticipate using terms similar to the following: client, server, avatar, filter, bandwidth.
`For the marketing employees, we anticipate using terms similar to the following: fea-
`ture, user, avatar, multiplayer, bandwidth. Please note that, pursuant to the order,
`Worlds anticipates using individualized terms for each custodian, and the terms identi-
`fied above are merely indicative (i.e., in line with Mr. Greene’s email, Worlds reserves
`the right to amend the proposed terms).
`
`In addition, Worlds anticipates that, because of the significant number of accused
`products, across many platforms, Worlds may need to collect email from additional
`custodians and reserves the right to make such a request to Defendants or the Court in
`the future.
`
`
`Finally, please confirm that, in collecting non-email documents, Defendants have
`searched all relevant central document repositories (including hard-copy document
`
`
`
`2
`
`Exhibit 2004
`Page 2 of 3
`
`

`
`
`
`November 13, 2014
`Page 3
`
`
`
`repositories), as well as the files of individual custodians who possess or control rele-
`vant information.
`
`* * *
`
`
`Please let us know your positions on these issues. If you have any issues with the
`foregoing, we would like to set up a call next Monday or Tuesday to discuss.
`
`
`Sincerely,
`
`/s/ Ryan V. Caughey
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2004
`Page 3 of 3

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