Case 6:21-cv-00933-ADA Document 42 Filed 02/24/22 Page 1 of 5
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`MYPAQ HOLDINGS LTD.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`DELL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and
`DELL INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`6:21-cv-00933-ADA
`
`ORDER GRANTING EARLY DISCOVERY
`
`Came on for consideration this date is Plaintiff MyPAQ Holdings Ltd.’s Request for Early
`
`Discovery. After careful consideration of the Motion, the Parties’ arguments, and the applicable
`
`law, the Court will ORDER early discover as indicated below.
`
`I. BACKGROUND
`
`On September 10, 2021, MyPAQ filed a patent infringement complaint against Dell
`
`Technologies, Inc. and Dell Inc. (collectively, “Dell”), accusing it of infringing two patents
`
`through the manufacture, use, and sale of power adapters and converters. See ECF No. 22.
`
`On January 20, 2022, MyPAQ and Dell approached the Court with a discovery dispute.
`
`Fact discovery had not yet opened at that point and is still not open. On January 26, 2022, the
`
`Court heard oral argument from MyPAQ and Dell (the “Parties”) on that dispute (the “First
`
`Hearing”). MyPAQ requested the following discovery, which Dell refused to give:
`
`1. documents sufficient to show the Dell devices made by each
`Taiwanese manufacturer;
`
`2. documents sufficient to show the number of devices sold to Dell
`by each manufacturer and the amount Dell paid for those
`devices;
`
`3.
`
`the contact information for Dell’s primary liaison at each
`manufacturer; and
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`MYPAQ HOLDINGS LTD.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`DELL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and
`DELL INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`6:21-cv-00933-ADA
`
`ORDER GRANTING EARLY DISCOVERY
`
`Came on for consideration this date is Plaintiff MyPAQ Holdings Ltd.’s Request for Early
`
`Discovery. After careful consideration of the Motion, the Parties’ arguments, and the applicable
`
`law, the Court will ORDER early discover as indicated below.
`
`I. BACKGROUND
`
`On September 10, 2021, MyPAQ filed a patent infringement complaint against Dell
`
`Technologies, Inc. and Dell Inc. (collectively, “Dell”), accusing it of infringing two patents
`
`through the manufacture, use, and sale of power adapters and converters. See ECF No. 22.
`
`On January 20, 2022, MyPAQ and Dell approached the Court with a discovery dispute.
`
`Fact discovery had not yet opened at that point and is still not open. On January 26, 2022, the
`
`Court heard oral argument from MyPAQ and Dell (the “Parties”) on that dispute (the “First
`
`Hearing”). MyPAQ requested the following discovery, which Dell refused to give:
`
`1. documents sufficient to show the Dell devices made by each
`Taiwanese manufacturer;
`
`2. documents sufficient to show the number of devices sold to Dell
`by each manufacturer and the amount Dell paid for those
`devices;
`
`3.
`
`the contact information for Dell’s primary liaison at each
`manufacturer; and
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00933-ADA Document 42 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 5
`
`4. all the OEM/Purchase Agreements with each manufacturer.
`
`During that hearing, the Court granted Dell’s requested relief and indicated it would issue
`
`an order to that effect. Before the Court could do so, a dispute arose between the Parties as to the
`
`scope and timing of the ordered discovery. On February 7, 2022, MyPAQ sent the Court an
`
`amended list of information it was seeking from Dell. Specifically, it requested, “[f]or each foreign
`
`OEM manufacturer/supplier of fast charging devices (‘FCDs’)”:
`
`1. documents sufficient to identify each FCD supplied to Dell by
`each foreign manufacturer/supplier;
`
`2. documents or information sufficient to show the number of each
`of the FCDs sold to Dell by each foreign manufacturer/supplier;
`
`3. documents or information sufficient to disclose the amount Dell
`paid for each FCD supplied
`to Dell from a foreign
`manufacturer/supplier on a per unit and cumulative basis;
`
`4.
`
`the contact information for Dell’s primary liaison at each foreign
`manufacturer/supplier of FCDs; and
`
`foreign
`each
`5. All OEM/Purchase Agreements with
`manufacturer/supplier of FCDs (“Agreements”), including any
`appendices, schedules, exhibits or amendments.
`
`On February 11, 2022, the Court held oral argument on MyPAQ’s amended requests (the “Second
`
`Hearing”).
`
`A.
`
`Opening Discovery Early
`
`II. ANALYSIS
`
`This Court appreciates the hurdles and delay attending discovery in China, Taiwan, and
`
`many other foreign countries. MyPAQ represented, without opposition from Dell, that a good
`
`portion of the discovery in this Action will come from Dell’s manufacturers abroad, primarily in
`
`Taiwan. The Court does not wish discovery in Taiwan to govern the pace at which this Action will
`
`proceed. Any hope of avoiding that scenario means allowing MyPAQ to proceed promptly with
`
`discovery from Dell. With that party discovery, MyPAQ can undertake the letters rogatory gauntlet
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00933-ADA Document 42 Filed 02/24/22 Page 3 of 5
`
`armed with tailored discovery requests for Dell’s foreign manufacturers. Accordingly, MyPAQ is
`
`granted its request for early discovery.
`
`B.
`
`Discovery Requests
`
`MyPAQ is seeking documents sufficient to show the Dell devices made by each
`
`manufacturer. MyPAQ conceded at the First Hearing that Dell produced technical specifications,
`
`in accord with the initial-disclosure requirement, but Dell limited that production to the product
`
`numbers MyPAQ’s Complaint expressly accuses. MyPAQ argued that it needs information on
`
`other Dell devices from Dell’s foreign manufacturers because “if we find out later that there are
`
`other products that have similar circuitry or design that they haven’t told us about, we’d have to
`
`go back to the manufacturer then to get the discovery.” First Hearing Tr., ECF No. 35, at 11:24–
`
`12:2. The Court is receptive to that argument.
`
`At the Second Hearing, MyPAQ narrowed its request to simply all FCDs from Dell’s
`
`manufacturers. Dell indicated that it does not know what the term “FCD” means and thus
`
`MyPAQ’s discovery request has an uncertain scope. MyPAQ then suggested that its request could
`
`be broadened to all charging devices and, as a practical matter, “the vast majority of them are going
`
`to be fast-charging devices because that’s what consumers demand.”
`
`The Court finds this request likely to produce evidence relevant to infringement. The Court
`
`finds that limiting the request to “charging devices” does not produce the same ambiguity as FCD.
`
`The Court will also, however, limit this request to the three Taiwanese vendors Dell and MyPAQ
`
`have specifically identified. It will also limit the request in time. These limitations sufficiently
`
`diminish the burden on Dell.
`
`MyPAQ also made similar requests as to the quantity and price of the charging devices, as
`
`well as OEM agreements related thereto. This information is at least relevant to damages. The
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00933-ADA Document 42 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 5
`
`Court will place the same vendor and time limitations on these requests, finding that this
`
`sufficiently reduces the burden on Dell.
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`
`It is therefore ORDERED that Dell produce:
`
`1. documents sufficient to identify each charging device supplied
`to
`Dell
`by
`the
`three
`identified
`Taiwanese
`manufacturer(s)/supplier(s);
`
`2. documents or information sufficient to show the number of each
`of the charging devices sold to Dell by each identified
`manufacturer/supplier;
`
`3. documents or information sufficient to disclose the amount Dell
`paid for each charging device supplied to Dell from the
`identified manufacturers/suppliers on a per unit and cumulative
`basis;
`
`4. the contact information for Dell’s primary liaison at each
`identified manufacturer/supplier; and
`
`identified
`each
`5. All OEM/Purchase Agreements with
`manufacturer/supplier (the “Agreement(s)”), including any
`appendices, schedules, exhibits or amendments.
`
`The relevant period for this discovery is from September 10, 2015 to the present (the
`
`“Period”), and any Agreements that cover sales during the Period should be included even if the
`
`execution date for that Agreement is earlier than the Period.
`
`Dell is ORDERED to produce this discovery on a rolling basis and as fast as practicably
`
`possible. Dell has been on notice since at least the First Hearing that the Court was going to order
`
`this type of discovery. Dell’s counsel represented at the Second Hearing that it was already in the
`
`process of gathering the relevant information. Dell has little excuse for delay. The Parties are
`
`instructed to provide a status update via email to this Court’s clerk two weeks from the date of this
`
`Order.
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00933-ADA Document 42 Filed 02/24/22 Page 5 of 5
`
`SIGNED this 24th day of February, 2022.
`
`
`ALAN D ALBRIGHT
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`MyPAQ, Exhibit 2006
`IPR2022-00311
`Page 5 of 5
`
`
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
