Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 2 of 28
`
`912112018 3:54 PM
`Chris Daniel - Distdot Olerk Harris County
`Envelope N0.27718698
`By: Anais Aguin'e
`Filed: 9121 12018 3:54 PM
`Pgs-4
`
`IN'I'T{E DISTRIC'I' COLIRT
`
`HAIU{IS COUNTY, ]]E,XAS
`
`STIPX
`ENTX
`ATFEX
`9A
`
`33 4TFl JUDICIAI- DISI]ìIC'I'
`
`cAUSE NO. 2016-03483
`
`$ {
`
`i $ {
`
`i $ {
`
`i $ $ $
`
`SANDBOX I.OGISTICS, LLC, ANd
`SANDY CREEK CAPII]AL, I.I,C
`
`VS
`
`AI{IIOWS UP, INC (nlkla AI{iìOWS Ul'
`IIOLDINGS, INC.), ARROWS UP, LLC,
`ancl JOI{N At.LlrGllET't'I
`
`FINAI-.IUDGMENT
`
`On '['uesclay, June 5,2018, this case was called to trial.
`
`Plaintifß SanclBox Logistios, LLC and Sandy Creek Capital, LLC (collectively,
`
`"SallcllJox") appeared through their attorneys and announced they were ready fbr trial.
`
`I)cl'en<lants Arrows Up, Inc. (nl\</tt Arrows Up Iiloldings, Inc.) and Arrows Up, LLC
`
`(collectively, "Arrows Up") ancl Defendant John Allegretti appeared through their attorneys and
`
`anuouncccl they were reacly lbr trial.
`
`A juty of twelve qualifìecl jurors of Ilarris County was selected, sworn, and empanelecl,
`
`aftcr- which the jury hearcf the evicience ancl thc arguments of counsel.
`
`Following the conclusion of evidence, the jury made findings that the Court receivecl,
`
`filccJ, ancl enterecl of record on Tuesday, July 3,2018. The questions submitted to the jury ancl
`
`the jury's f-rndings ¿rre ¿rtt¿rched as trlxhibit I and incorporated by reference.
`
`'l'he Couú renclers juclgment f,or PIaintifï SandRox against Defendants Arrows Up ancl
`
`John Allegretti as fbllows:
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 1
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 3 of 28
`
`DAMAGES
`
`PlaintifT S¿rnclllox shall recover jointly and severally fiom Defèndants Arrows Up
`
`521,686,428 in disgorÉlement Sandllox shall also recover from Defendant John Allegretti
`
`$15,603,300 in lost profit damages, and $846,599.33 in prejudgment interest (calculated on the
`
`past clarnage awarcl of $6,345,149 at the annual rate of 5%) through September 20,2018, plus
`
`$869.20 in prejr,rdgment interest pel clay for each day af'ter Septernber 20, 2018 until tlie day
`
`befbre the clate this Final Juclgmcnt is signecl. Provicled, however, that SandBox may not collect
`
`trrore tlran 521,686,428 in ac;tual damages and clisgorgement from all defendants.
`
`Sandllox shall also recover 527,541,840 for exemplary damages from Arrows Up, LLC,
`
`based on the concluct of'Anows IJp, Inc. and the jury finding against Arrows up.
`
`In llte ctllentctlive, shouicl the fiaucl oause oflaotion or the exemplary damages awarcl be
`
`set asicle, PlaintifÏ SandBox sh¿ill recover jointly and severally from Defenclants Arrows Up
`821,686,428 in clisgorgemettt, SandRox shall also recover lrom Defendant John AllegreLti
`
`$1-5,603,300 in lost profit clamages, and $846,599.33 in prejudgrnent interest (calculated on tlìe
`
`past clamage award of $6,345,I49 al the annual rate of 5%) through Septernber 20, 2018, ph"rs
`
`$8(19.20 in preju<lgrnent interest per clay fbr each day after September 20,2018 untii the clay
`
`befbre the date tltis lìinal Judgment is signed. SandBox shall also recover jointly ancl severally
`
`li'om f)efèndants Arrows {Jp and John Allegretti $2,511,310 in attorney's fees through trial,
`
`$200,000 in attorney's foes in the event of an appeal by Defendants to the Court of Appeals,
`
`$3-5,000 iIì attorney's fees in the event a petition for review is filecl with the Texas Supreme
`
`Court, $150,000 in attctmey's fèes in the event briefs on the merits are requested by the T'exas
`
`Suprerne Clourl, $,50,000 in att.orney's fees in the event oral argument is grantecl by the l'exas
`
`Supreme Couft, ancl S 1,069,01[l in expenses ftrr breach of contract,
`
`2
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 2
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 4 of 28
`
`In eilht:r .scenctrio, should the disgorgernent award be set aside, Plaintiff SandBox shall
`
`recover in its plaoe jointly and severally fiom Def-endants Arrows Up ancl John Allegretti
`
`$15,603,300 in lost prolÌt damages, and $846,599.33 in prejudgment interest (calculated on the
`
`past clarnage award o1'$6,345,149 at the annual rate of 5%) through Septernber 20, 201tì, plus
`
`$869.20 in prejuclgment interest per day for each day after September 20, 20IB Lrntil the day
`
`befbre the date this Iìinal Judgment is signed.
`
`DECLAIìA'I'OR.Y RELIEF
`
`The Couft cleclares that the frac sand shipping containers Arrows Up has manufactured,
`
`solcl, or lcasecl since signing the Settlement Agreement and Release ("settlement Agreemcnt")
`
`¿rre "Iìelated Inventiolts" as clefined by Section 4 of the Mutual Confidentiality arrd Non-
`
`Disclosr"lre Agreement ("NDA") ancl are owned solely and exclusively by Plaintifl Sandtsox.
`
`The Court deolares that the 1'ollowing features or components of Defenclants Arrows Up's
`
`post-Seitlernent Agreernent containers are each a "Iìelatecl Invention" as defrnecl by Section 4 o1'
`
`the NDA: c'limensions, weíght capacity, roof hatch, felt gasket material, stacking colles, tubular
`
`Ibrk pockets, funnel angles, ancl cletachable ladcler. Each is owned solely aud exclusiveiy by
`
`PlaintifT SandBox.
`
`COI{VERSION
`
`Plaintiff Sandllox is awarcled title to and possession of any frac sand shipping containers
`
`that Alrows Up has manuf.acturecl, sold, or leased since entering into the Settlement Agreement
`
`which are in the ¡rclssession of Arrows Up on the date this Judgment is signecl. Arrows Up is
`
`orcf crecl to cleliver these shipping containers to SandBox within the later of 30 days of the date
`
`this.luclgment is sigrrecl or, if posl-juclgrnentmotions are liled,30 days afterthe date c¡f'the order
`
`overrul ing ¡rost-j uclgrn ent ln oti c-rns.
`
`J
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 3
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 5 of 28
`
`Plaintilf Sandllox is awarded titleto an<l possession of any frac sand shipping containers
`
`that Arrows Up lias lnanufàctul'ecl, solcl, or Ieased since entering into the Settlement Agreement
`
`ancl which are being cut'rently Ieased-including the containers being leased under the contracts
`
`iclentifiecf in Exhibit 2 and which forrned the basis of the award of future damages in this case--
`
`on the clay such leases expire. Arrows Up is ordered to deliver such containers to Sandllox
`
`within 10 days of the end of respective leases.
`
`M TSCEI,LANEOUS T{EI,IEF
`
`Plaintiff SanciRox shail recover court costs from Defendants Arrows Up and Allegretti,
`
`including any court costs incurred in enforcement and collection.
`
`All awarcls shall bear post-jr-rdgrnent interest at the annual rate of 5% until paicl.
`All relief not expressly grantecl by this Judgment is denied. This judgment is final,
`
`clisposes of all claims and parties, ancl is appealable,
`
`'I'he Coult orders exeoution to issue for this Judgment, including any writs or processes
`
`for the enforoement ancl collection of this Judgment or the costs of court as necessary.
`
`SIGNtrD this __ day of
`
`2018
`
`Signed:
`101212018
`
`,-<\-- l/ , /
`C).*{-v{^Ð
`
`PRESIDING JI.JDGE
`
`4
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 4
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 6 of 28
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 5
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 7 of 28
`
`7,
`
`cÄusE No. 2016-03483
`
`üËrrGrNAr Q\q
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT O['
`
`HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
`
`334th JUDICIAL
`
`u,,W,fl*.
`
`$ $ $ $ $ $ $
`
`SANDBOX LOGISTICS' LLC and
`SANDY CREEK CAPITAL, LLC
`
`vs.
`
`ÄRROWS UP,INC., ARRO\ryS UP,
`LLC and JOHN ALLEGRETTI
`
`CHARGE OF THE CqURT
`
`JUI - 3 20tB
`
`Members of the Jury:
`
`op
`This case is submitted to you by asking questions about the facts, which you must decide from
`the evidence you have heard in this trial.' 'You are the sole judges of the credibility of the
`witnesses .and the weight to be given their testimony, but in matters of law, you must be
`governed by the instruotions in this charge. In discharging your responsibility on this jury, you
`will observe ali the instructions which have previously been given you. I shall now give you
`additional instructions which you should carefirlly and strictly follow during your deliberations.
`After the olosing arguments, you will go to the jury room to decide the case, atrswer the
`questions that arô attached, and reach a verdict. You may discuss the case with other jurors only
`when you are all together in the jury room.
`
`Remembsr my previous instructions: Do not discuss the case with anyone else, either in person
`or by any other means. Do not do any independent investigation about the case or conduct any
`reseàrch. Do not look up any words in dictionaries ot' on the Internet. Do not post information
`about the case on the Internet. Do not share any special knowledge or experiences with the other
`jurors. Do not use your mobile phone or any other electronic devices dwìng your deliberations. I
`will give you a number where others may contact you in case of an emergency.
`A¡y notes you have taken are for your own personal use and may be taken back into the jury
`room ald consulted by you during deliberations, but do not show or read your notes to your
`fellow jurors during your deliberations. Your notes are not evidence. Each of you should rely
`upon yóut independent recollection ofthe evidence and not be influenced by the fact that another
`juror lias taken notes.
`
`you must leave your notes with the baiiiff when you are not deliberating. The bailiff will give
`your notes to me promptly after collecting them from you. I will make sure your notes are kept in
`â safe, secure locatior and not disclosed to anyone. After you complete your deliberations, the
`bailiff will collect your notes. When you are released from jury duty, the bailiff will promptly
`destroy your notes so that nobody can read what you wrote.
`
`I
`
`RECORDER'S MEIHORÂItDUM
`Thls lnslrument ls of poorquality
`at the timo of lmaglng.
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 6
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 8 of 28
`
`ere are instructions for answering the questions.
`1. Do not let bias, prejudice, or sympathy play any part in your deliberations
`
`In arriving at your answers, consider only the evidence introduced here under oath
`and such exhibits as have been introduced for your consideration under the rulings
`of the court, that is, what you have seen and heard in this courtroom, together with
`the law as given you by the court. In your deliberations, you will not consider or
`discuss anything that is not represented by the evidence in this case.
`
`You are to make up your own minds about the facts. You are the sole judges of
`the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to give their testimony. But on
`matters of law, you must follow all of my instruotions.
`
`If my instructions use a word in a way that is different from its ordinary meaning,
`use the meaning I give you, which will be a proper legal definition.
`
`Since every answer that is required by this charge is important, no juror should
`state or consider that any required answer is not important.
`
`You must not decide who you think should win, and then try to answer the
`questions aocordingly. Simply answer the questions, and do not discuss nor
`concem yourselves with the effect of your answers.
`
`You will not decide the answer to a question by lot or by drawing straws, or by
`any other method of chance. Do not return a quotient verdict. A quotient verdict
`means that the jurors agree to abide by the result to be reached by adding together
`each juror's figures and dividing by the number ofjurors to get an average.
`
`Do not do any trading on your answors; that is, one juror should not agree to
`answer a certain question one way if others will agree to answer another question
`another way. For example, do not say, 'oI will answer this question your way if
`you answer another question my way."
`
`Unless otherwise instructed, you may render your verdict upon the vote of ten or
`more members of the jury. The same ten or more of you must agree upon all of
`the answers made and to the entire verdict. You will not, therefore, enter into an
`agreement to be bound by a majority or any other vote of less than ten jurors. If
`the verdict arrd all of the answers therein are reached by unanimous agreement,
`the presiding juror shall sign the verdict for the entire jury. If any juror disagrees
`as to any answer made by the verdict, those jutors who agree to all findings shall
`each sign the verdict.
`
`)H
`
`J
`
`4,
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`Some questions might ask you for a dollar amount. Do not agree in advance to
`decíde on a dollar amount by adding up each juror's amount and then f,rguring the
`average.
`
`2
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 7
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 9 of 28
`
`These instructions are given you because your conduct is subject to review the same as
`that of the witnesses, parties, attorneys, and the judge. If it should be found that you have
`disregalded any of these instructions, it will be jury misconduct and it may require another trial
`by another jury; then all of our time will have been wasted.
`
`The presiding juror or any other who observes a violation of the court's instructions shall
`immediately warn the one who is violating the same and caution the juror not to do so again.
`
`When words are used in this charge in a sense that varies from the meaning commonly
`understood, you are given a proper legal defrnition, which you are bound to accept in plaoe of
`any other meaning.
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" to all questions unless otherwise instructed. A "Yes" answet must
`be based on a preponderance of the evidence, If you do not find that a preponderance of the
`evidence supports a "Yes" answer, then answer "No." 'Whenever a question requires an answef
`other than "yes" or "no", your answer must be based on a preponderance of the evidence unless
`you are told otherwise.
`The term I'preponderânce of the evidcnce" means the greater weight of oredible
`evidence admitted in this case. A preponderance of the evidence is not measured by the number
`of witnesses or by the number of documents admitted in evidence. For a fact to be proved by a
`preponderance of the evidence, you must find that the fact is more likely true than not true.
`Whenever a question requires other than a "Yes" or "No" answer, your answer must be based on
`a preponderance ofthe evidence,
`
`A fact may be established by direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence or both. A
`fact is established by direct evidence when proved by documentary evidence or by witnesses
`who saw the act done or heard the words spoken. A fact is established by circurnstantial
`evidence when it may be fairly and reasonably inferred from other facts proved,
`
`3
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 8
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 10 of 28
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`"SandBox" means SandBox Logistics, LLC and Sandy Creek Capital, LLC.
`
`"Arrows IJp" means Anows Up, Inc. (now known as Arrows Up Holdíngs, Inc.) and
`Arrows Up, LLC, collectively.
`
`"NDA" means the Mutual Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement dated January
`29,2014,
`
`"settlement Agreement" means the Settlement Agreement and Release dated January
`23,2015,
`
`4
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 9
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 11 of 28
`
`Question No. I
`
`Did either of the parties named below fail to comply with the following subsections of
`the Settlement Agreement?
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" with respect to each of the following:
`
`a. Section III-C-1?
`
`(A) Arrows un: Y€5
`V E-S
`I
`
`(B) John Allegretti
`
`b. Section III'D-6?
`(A) Arrows Up Y<s
`(B) John Allegretti: V¿f>
`
`c, Section III-D-7?
`
`(A) Arrows Up:
`
`rl€,5
`(B) Joln Allegretti : \/e9
`
`I
`
`5
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 10
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 12 of 28
`
`Question No.2
`Did either of the parties named below fail to comply with Section III-D-I of the
`Settlement Agreement?
`
`In answering this question, it is your duty to interpret the term "substantially similar" in
`the definition of "Container(s)" in Seotion II of the Settlement Agreement,
`
`You must decide its meaning by determining the intent of the parties at the time of the
`agreement. Consider all the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of the
`agreement, the interpretation placed on the agreement by the parties, and the conduct of
`the parties.
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" with respect to each of the following:
`(A) Arrows Up:
`(B) John Allegretti:
`
`ve-3
`I
`
`6
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 11
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 13 of 28
`
`Question No,3
`
`Did Anows Up fail to comply with Sections 2 and 8.2 of the NDA?
`Answer ttYes" or ttNo,t'
`Answer: \/ Ø5
`
`7
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 12
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 14 of 28
`
`If you answered "Yes'o to any part of Questions 1-3, then answer the following question.
`Otherwise, do not answer the following question.
`
`Question No. 4
`
`What sum of money, if any, if paid now in cash, would fairly and reasonably compensate
`SandBox for íts damages, if any, that resulted from such failure to comply?
`
`Consider the following element of damages, if any, and none other:
`
`In answering questions about damages, answer eaoh question separately. Do not increase
`or reduce the arnount in one answer because of your answer to any other question about
`damages. Do not speculate about what any party's ultirnate recovery may or may not be,
`Any recovery wìll be determined by the court when it applies the law to your answers at
`the time ofjudgment,
`
`Do not add any amount for interest on damages, if any.
`
`Answer separately in dollars and cents for damages, if any,
`A.
`
`B
`
`Lost profits sustained in the past in relation to SandBox oustomers who also
`became Arrows Up customers that were a nafural, probable, and forese.eable
`consequence of Arrows Up's failure to comply.
`Answer: Ø,3q5J14 , oo
`Lost profits that, in reasonable probability, will be sustained in the future in
`relation to SandBox customers who also became Arrows Up customers that are a
`natural, probable, and foreseeable consequence of Arrows Up's failure to comply.
`l"oo
`a58
`Answer:
`C. Amount of profit that furows Up acquired as a result of íts failure to cornply in
`the past.
`¿lt-l5
`
`D.
`
`Answer:
`
`8
`
`Answer:
`
`oo
`
`'{l "
`Amount of profit that Arrows Up will acquire as a result of its failure to comply
`that, in reasonable probability, will be sustained in the future.
`eq0 5ß7, aO
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 13
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 15 of 28
`
`Question No. 5
`
`Do the frac sand shipping containers that Arrows Up has manufactured, sold, or leased
`since entering into the Settlement Agreement qualify as "Related Inventions" as defïned by the
`following sections of the NDA?
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" for each of the following:
`\/e5
`(A) Section 4(A);
`(B) Section 4(B):
`ve-5
`(C) Sootion 4(C):
`
`9
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 14
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 16 of 28
`
`Did the following defendants commit fraud against SandBox such that SandBox was
`induced to enter into the Settlement Agreement?
`
`Question No, 6
`
`Flaud ogcurs when-
`'1,
`
`a party makes a material misrepresentation, and
`
`')
`
`the misrepresentation is made with knowledge of its falsity or made tecklessly
`without any knowledge of the truth and as a positive assertion, and
`
`the misrepresentation is made with the intention that it should be acted on by the
`other party, and
`
`4,
`
`the other party relies on the misrepresentation and thereby suffers injury
`
`"Misrepresentation" means a promise of future performance made with an intent, at the
`time the promise was made, not to perform as promised.
`
`Answer "Yes" or'1{o."
`
`(A) Anows Up:
`
`(B) John Allegretti:
`
`\te5
`Iv¿5
`
`I
`
`10
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 15
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 17 of 28
`
`If you answered "Yes" to Question 6(A) or 6@), then answer the following question with
`respect to the parties named below. Otherwise, do not answer the following question.
`
`What surn of money, if any, if paid now in cash, would fairly and reasonably compensate
`SandBox for its damages, if any, that resulted from such fraud?
`
`Question No. 7
`
`Consider the following element of damages, if any, and none other.
`
`In answering questions about damages, answer each question separately. Do not increase
`or reduce the amount in one ansv/er beoause of your answer to any other question about
`damages. Do not speculate about what any party's ultimate recovery may or may not be,
`Any recovery will be determined by the court when it applies the law to your answers at
`the time ofjudgment. Do not add any amount for interest on damages, if any.
`
`Answer separately in dollars and cents for damages, if any.
`A,
`
`Lost profits sustained in the past in relation to SandBox customers who also
`became Arrows Up customers that were a natural, probable, and foreseeable
`consequence of Arrows Up's fraud.
`Answer: 6t 241 t 14C{ " o0
`B.
`Lost profits that, in reasonable probability, will be sustained in the future in
`relation to SandBox customers who also became Arrows Up customers that are a
`natural, probable, and foreseeable consequence of Arrows Up's fraud,
`
`atrr*"t: %å"Sß,/5l.oo
`C, Arnount of profit that Anows Up acquired as a result of its fraud in the past.
`q'll , oO
`Answe': 8r 445 ,
`D. Amount of profit that Arrows Up will acquire as a result of its fraud that, in
`reasonable probabilþ, will be sustained in the future.
`Answer: ßJ A4O /581'oO
`
`11
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 16
`
`

`

`U ,t^
`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 18 of 28
`(e5
`
`((
`
`Ans
`of Question
`
`following question only if you have unanimously answered
`Otherwise, do not ans\iler the following question.
`
`to aq*pa*-
`
`To answer'oYes" to the following question, your answer must be unanimous. You may
`answer 'oNo" to the following question only upon a vote of ten or more jurors. Otherwise, you
`must not answer the following question.
`
`Question No. I
`Do you find by clear and convincing evidence that the harm to SandBox resulted from
`any fraud by Arrows Up found by you in Question 6?
`
`"Clear and convincing evidenee" means the measure or degree of proof that produces a
`firm belief or conviction of the truth of the allegations sought to be established.
`
`You are instructed that Arrows Up may be held liable because of an act by John
`Allegretti if, but only if John Allegretti was employed as a vice-principal and was acting
`in the scope of employment.
`A person ís a'ovice-principal" if-
`1,
`
`that person is a corporate officer; or
`
`2
`
`5
`
`/lT
`
`that person has authority to employ, direct, and discharge an employee of Arrows
`up; or
`
`that person is engaged in the performance of nondelegable or absolute duties of
`Arrows Up; or
`
`Arrows Up has confided to that person the management of the whole or
`department or division of the business of Arrows Up.
`
`Answer ttYes" or ttNo.t'
`
`Answer:
`
`t2
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 17
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 19 of 28
`
`Answer the following question only if you unanimously answered "Yes" to Question 8.
`Otherwise, do not answer the following question.
`
`You must unzurirnously agree on the amount of any award of exemplary damages.
`
`Question No. 9
`
`What sum of money, if any, if paid now in oash, should be assessed against Arrows Up
`and awarded to SandBox as exemplary darnages, if any, for the conduct found in response to
`Question 8?
`
`"Exemplary damages" means an amount that you may in your discretion award as a
`penalty or by way of punishment.
`Factors to consider in awarding exemplary damages, if any, ars-
`
`ã.
`
`tr.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`f.
`
`The nature of the wrong
`
`The character of the conduct involved,
`
`The degree of culpability of Arrows Up.
`
`The situation and sensibilities of the parties concerned.
`
`The extent to which such conduct offencls a public sense ofjustice and propriety.
`
`The net worth of Arrows Up.
`
`Answer in dollars and cents, if any
`40,oo
`5¿ll
`
`Answer:
`
`13
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 18
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 20 of 28
`
`If you answered 'oYes" to Question No. 5, then answer the following question. Otherwise,
`do not answer the following question
`
`Do the following features or components of Arrows Up's post-Settlement Agreement
`containers constitute a "Related Invontion" as defined by Section 4 of the NDA:
`
`Question No. 10
`
`Answer'oYes" or "No" for each of the following:
`ve9
`ve5
`
`(A)
`
`(B)
`
`Dimensions:
`
`Weight Capacity:
`
`\l e-5
`l e,9t-
`Jz9
`Lt
`
`Iv
`
`I r
`
`(c)
`
`(D)
`
`(E)
`
`(F)
`
`(G)
`
`(H)
`
`Roof Hatch:
`
`Felt Gasket Material:
`
`Stacking Cones:
`
`Tubular Fork Pockets:
`
`Funnel Angles:
`
`Detachable Ladder:
`
`l4
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 19
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 21 of 28
`
`If you have answered 'oYes" to any portion of Question No. 10, then answer the following
`question only for each feature ot component for which you have answered "Yes". Otherwise, do
`not answer the following question.
`
`Is SandBox estopped from claiming that the features or components listed below of the
`Gen 1 and Gen 2 prototype designs are a "Related Invention" under the NDA?
`
`Question No. 11
`
`SandBox is estopped if the following circumstances occurred:
`1.
`
`SandBox:
`
`a
`
`b.
`
`by words or corrduct made a false representation or concealed material
`facts, and
`
`with knowledge of the facts or with knowledge or information that would
`lead a reasonable person to discover the facts, and
`
`with the intention that Anows Up would rely on the false representation or
`concealment in acting or deciding not to act; and
`
`)
`
`Arrows Up:
`a.
`
`did not know and had no means of knowing the real facts, and
`
`b
`
`relied to its detriment on the false representation or concealment of
`material facts,
`
`(A)
`
`(B)
`
`(c)
`
`Dimensions:
`
`Weight Capacity:
`
`Roof Hatch:
`
`(D)
`
`Felt Gasket Material:
`
`Answer "YeS" or "No" fOr eaoh item for which you answered "YeS" in Question 10:
`/üo
`NÚ
`NO
`A.l o
`t\)O
`/\.) o
`ñ0
`]\Jo
`
`(E)
`
`(F)
`
`(G)
`
`(H)
`
`Stacking Cones:
`
`Tubular Fork Pockets:
`
`Funnel Angles:
`
`Detachable Ladder:
`
`15
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 20
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 22 of 28
`
`If you have answered "Yes" to either of Question No. l, 3, 5(A) or 5@), then answer the
`following question only for each Question for which you have answered "Yes". Otherwise, do
`not answer the following question.
`
`QuestÍon No. 12
`
`Has A:rows Up proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the information that
`fonned the basis of yõui answer to Question No. 1, 3, 5(A), or 5(B) satisfïed the following
`conditions:
`a.
`
`was already known to Arows Up at the time of disclosure by SandBox as shown
`by Arrows Up's files and records immediately prior to the time of SandBox's
`disclosure: or
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`was already in possession of the public or became available to the public other
`than through the act or omission of Arrows Up: or
`
`was obtained by Arrows Up from a third party lavdully in possession of such
`information at the time it was acquired by Anows Up and without a breach of
`such third party's obligations of confidentiality: or
`
`was independently developed by Anows Up without reference to or reliance upon
`the Confidential Data provided by SandBox under the NDA, as shown by
`documents and other competent evidence in Arrows Up's possession.
`
`You are instructed that specifîc disclosures made under the NDA do not satisfy any of these
`conditions merely becausó they were embraced by general disclosures in the public knowledge
`or literature or disclosures in the possession of Arrows Up.
`you are instructed that any combinations of features disclosed under the NDA do not satisfy any
`of these conditions merely because individual features were in the public knowledge or literature
`or in the possession of Arrows UP'
`,.Clear and convincing evidence" means the measure or degree of proof that produces a firm
`belief or conviction of the truth of the allegations sought to be established.
`Answer "Yes" or o'No" to each of the following:
`À)o
`fú ()
`
`Question 1:
`
`Question 3
`Questions 5(A) or (B):
`
`f\)
`
`t6
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 21
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 23 of 28
`
`When you go into the jury room to answer the questions, the first thing you will need to
`do is choose a presiding juror.
`
`Presiding Juror
`The presíding juror has these duties:
`
`a. Have the complete charge read aloud if it will be helpful to your deliberations.
`b. Preside over your deliberations. This means the presiding juror will manage the
`discussions, and see that you follow the instructions.
`c. Give written questions or comments to the bailiff who will give them to the judge.
`d, Write down the answers you agree on'
`e. Get the signatures for the verdict ceftiftcate.
`f, Notify the bailiff that you havç reached a verdict.
`Do you understand the duties of the presiding juror? If you do not, pleæe tell me now.
`
`Instructions for Signing the Verdict CertifÏcate
`
`1. You may answer the questions on a vote of 10 jurors. The same 10 jurors must agtee on
`every answer in the charge, This means you cannot have one group of 10 jurors agree on
`one ansv/er and a different group of l0jurors agree on another answer.
`2. If 10 jurors agree on every answer, those 10 jurors sígn the verdict.
`If 11 jurors agree on every answer, those 1i jurors sign the verdict.
`If all 12 of you agree on every answer, you are unanimous and only the presiding juror
`signs the verdict.
`3. Ail jurors should deliberate on every question. You may end up with all 12 of you
`agrèeing on some answers, while only 10 or 11 of you agree on other answers' But when
`you sign the verdict, only those 10 who agree on every ans\iler will sign the verdict.
`
`Do you understand these instructions? If you do not, please tell me now
`
`Kirkland
`
`T7
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 22
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 24 of 28
`
`Verdict Certifïcate
`
`Our verdict is unanimous, All twelve of us have agreed to each and every answer
`the certificate for all 12 of us.
`The presiding juror
`
`Juror
`
`11
`name of Presiding Juror
`
`is not unanimous, Eleven of us have agteed to each and every answer
`Our
`and have signed the certifrcate below.
`
`Our verdict is not unanimous. Ten of us have agreed to each and every answer
`and have signed the certificate below.
`SIGNATURE
`
`NAME PRINTED
`
`Check one:
`,r/
`
`1.
`)
`
`4,
`
`5 6
`
`.
`
`"l
`
`8,
`
`9.
`
`10,
`
`11.
`
`18
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 23
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 25 of 28
`
`A
`
`I
`
`if you have answered Questions No, 8 or 9, then you must sign this certificate also.
`Additional Ccrtificate /'\ /tS
`/
`I certify that the jury was unanimous in answerf the following questions or parts of
`questions marked "yes" below. All twelve of us agreed t-o each of the answers marked "yes."
`The presiding juror has signed the certificate for all twelve of us'
`Answer "yes" or o'no" for each of the following:
`
`vea
`¿5
`Iv¿5
`
`IV
`
`Question No. 6
`Question No. I
`
`Question No. 9
`
`Juror
`
`'B¡"orn/o é u, I l¿"^
`Printed Name of Presiding Juror
`
`t9
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 24
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 26 of 28
`
`ffiKF{åffirT 2
`
`Ex. 2006
`Arrows Up v. Oren Technologies
`IPR2018-01230
`
`Page 25
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-01945 Document 69-1 Filed in TXSD on 10/09/18 Page 27 of 28
`
`tr-cî
`cì
`
`I\o v-)
`cî c.l
`v.) \i-
`OO
`cì c'.1
`ÞÞ
`
`t/^)
`c1
`
`cì
`
`Þ I
`
`'+carô
`
`N Ð
`
`caclrô
`O(\
`
`Icì
`aa
`(\
`,.)4
`
`clt¡')
`
`c..l
`
`IOc
`
`ÕO(
`
`\
`
`o\(\\n
`
`c.¡
`
`Þ4
`
`I
`
`co
`c.l
`
`c.l
`Þ
`
`F-cì
`cl
`
`I\o
`cl
`
`Oc
`
`l Þ4
`
`\a¡(\
`
`Oc
`
`'ì
`
`Þ I
`
`(\
`tr)
`cl
`Þ-t
`
`c1
`c.l
`
`Oc
`
`.l
`
`Þ I
`
`(\
`tr)
`O(\
`
`IO(\
`ta)
`cl
`
`"l
`
`o\
`
`N Þj
`
`I
`
`co
`
`ocl
`
`tr-
`r)
`.ì
`
`Oc
`
`I\o
`\ô
`O(\
`
`(\
`
`Þ I
`
`.if
`
`(\
`¿
`
`c-í'ro
`
`cl (\
`ÞÞ
`t