From:
`Sent:
`To:
`
`Cc:
`Subject:
`
`Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>
`Monday, May 3, 2021 5:52 PM
`chad.walters@bakerbotts.com; clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com; Trey Powers; Jason
`Fitzsimmons; Steve Merrill; John Bamert; PTAB Account
`david.wille@bakerbotts.com; jperkins@perkinsip.com; PTAB Account; PTAB Account
`RE: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`EXTERNAL EMAIL: Use caution before clicking links or attachments.
`
`Thanks Chad. I can confirm that we will oppose the motion for the modified PO and that we will maintain any
`information designated as AEO in the PTAB proceeding according to the terms of the proposed modified PO
`until the PTAB rules on your motion. Let me know if you have any questions. Mark.
`
`From: chad.walters@bakerbotts.com <chad.walters@bakerbotts.com>
`Sent: Monday, May 03, 2021 12:42 PM
`To: Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>; clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com; tpowers-
`PTAB@sternekessler.com; jfitzsimmons-PTAB@sternekessler.com; smerrill-PTAB@sternekessler.com; John Bamert
`<bamert@lowegrahamjones.com>; PTAB@sternekessler.com
`Cc: david.wille@bakerbotts.com; jperkins@perkinsip.com
`Subject: RE: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`Mark,
`
`An AEO designation is appropriate here because Patent Owner intends to file confidential, competitively-sensitive
`business information. Specifically, Patent Owner intends to file information about Patent Owner’s sales and gross
`revenue—information that is not otherwise available to the public – and information concerning settlement agreements
`where Patent Owner may have a confidentiality obligation to a third party. Confidential commercial information such as
`this is the type of information to be protected pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a)(7). Providing Petitioner or employees of
`Petitioner, including in-house counsel, access to Patent Owner’s confidential materials could cause harm to Patent
`Owner. Thus, an AEO designation is warranted here and consistent with the district court protective order permitting
`financial information to be designated “Outside Counsel Attorneys Eyes Only.”
`
`If Petitioner is unwilling to agree to an AEO designation for the PTAB proceeding, Patent Owner will proceed with filing a
`motion for entry of the modified protective order we provided.
`
`Please confirm that you will keep the designated information as outside AEO (under the terms of our proposed
`protective order) until the Board has resolved this issue.
`
`Chad
`
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`chad.walters@bakerbotts.com
`T +1.214.953.6511
`F +1.214.661.4511
`M +1.214.557.2423
`
`2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 900
`
`1
`
`EX1038
`Yita v. MacNeil
`IPR2020-01139
`
`

`

`Dallas, TX 75201
`USA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>
`Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 11:00 AM
`To: Walters, Chad <chad.walters@bakerbotts.com>; Stavinoha, Clarke <clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com>; tpowers-
`PTAB@sternekessler.com; jfitzsimmons-PTAB@sternekessler.com; smerrill-PTAB@sternekessler.com; John Bamert
`<bamert@lowegrahamjones.com>; PTAB@sternekessler.com
`Cc: Wille, David <david.wille@bakerbotts.com>; jperkins@perkinsip.com
`Subject: RE: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`
`[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
`
`Hi Chad:
`
`
`We believe the default protective order is adequate before the PTAB. Further, generally, information Patent
`Owner relies on for alleged patentability should be accessible to the public as part of the quid pro quo of the
`patent system. So, we may oppose any motion to seal. Additionally, setting aside what we did it in the district
`court, can you explain an AEO level of protection is appropriate here?
`
`
`Thanks. Mark.
`
`
`From: chad.walters@bakerbotts.com <chad.walters@bakerbotts.com>
`Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2021 9:55 AM
`To: Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>; clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com; tpowers-
`PTAB@sternekessler.com; jfitzsimmons-PTAB@sternekessler.com; smerrill-PTAB@sternekessler.com; John Bamert
`<bamert@lowegrahamjones.com>; PTAB@sternekessler.com
`Cc: david.wille@bakerbotts.com; jperkins@perkinsip.com
`Subject: RE: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`
`Mark,
`
`
`The type of information we would be designating as AEO is the same type of information Petitioner has agreed is AEO in
`the district court.
`
`
`What is the basis for Petitioner not agreeing to an AEO designation in the PTAB?
`
`
`Chad
`
`
`
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`chad.walters@bakerbotts.com
`T +1.214.953.6511
`
`2
`
`

`

`F +1.214.661.4511
`M +1.214.557.2423
`
`2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75201
`USA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>
`Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 6:44 PM
`To: Stavinoha, Clarke <clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com>; tpowers-PTAB@sternekessler.com; jfitzsimmons-
`PTAB@sternekessler.com; smerrill-PTAB@sternekessler.com; John Bamert <bamert@lowegrahamjones.com>;
`PTAB@sternekessler.com
`Cc: Wille, David <david.wille@bakerbotts.com>; Walters, Chad <chad.walters@bakerbotts.com>;
`jperkins@perkinsip.com
`Subject: RE: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`
`[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
`
`Thank you Clarke. The Petitioner cannot agree to an AEO level designation for purposes of the PTAB
`protective order. If you would like to discuss, let me know. Mark.
`
`
`From: Stavinoha, Clarke <clarke.stavinoha@BakerBotts.com>
`Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 12:41 PM
`To: Mark Walters <walters@lowegrahamjones.com>; tpowers-PTAB@sternekessler.com; jfitzsimmons-
`PTAB@sternekessler.com; smerrill-PTAB@sternekessler.com; John Bamert <bamert@lowegrahamjones.com>;
`PTAB@sternekessler.com
`Cc: Wille, David <david.wille@bakerbotts.com>; Walters, Chad <chad.walters@bakerbotts.com>;
`jperkins@perkinsip.com
`Subject: IPR2020-01139, -01142 - Protective Order & Motion to Seal
`
`
`Counsel,
`
`
`Patent Owner intends to file confidential business information relating to its product sales and gross revenues with its
`Patent Owner Responses. Accordingly, we plan to file a motion to seal and for entry of a protective order concurrent
`with our responses.
`
`I’ve attached our proposed modifications to the Board’s default protective order. We attempted to align the
`designations with those in the district court protective order while minimizing revisions to the default order as the Board
`typically prefers. Please let us know if these are acceptable to Petitioner.
`
`
`Also, please confirm that Petitioner will not oppose our motion to seal. Once we have agreement on the terms of the
`protective order, we would be happy to send you a draft of that motion ahead of filing.
`
`
`Thanks,
`Clarke
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`Clarke Stavinoha
`Senior Associate
`
`
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`clarke.stavinoha@bakerbotts.com
`T +1.214.953.6484
`F +1.214.661.4484
`M +1.214.793.0114
`
`
`2001 Ross Avenue
`Suite 900
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`
`
`
`
`Confidentiality Notice:
`
`The information contained in this email and any attachments is intended only for the recipient[s] listed above and may be privileged
`and confidential. Any dissemination, copying, or use of or reliance upon such information by or to anyone other than the recipient[s]
`listed above is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately at the email address
`above and destroy any and all copies of this message.
`
`4
`
`