Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID 483
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 1 of 3 Page|D 483
`
`
`
`BERRY ° SID/[Sm
`
`The Tower at Peabody Piace
`100 Peabody Place, Suite 900
`Memphis, TN 38183-3672
`(902) 543-5900
`
`January 18, 2013
`
`Jonathan E. Nelson
`PHONE:
`(901)543-5988
`FAX:
`(87?) 521-281?
`E-MAIL:
`ieneison@bassberry.com
`
`Craig R. Kaufman
`Freitas Tseng & Kaufman LLP
`100 Marine Parkway, Suite 200
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`
`Re:
`
`B.E. Tea-h., LLC v. Samsung, Civ Nos. 12-cv-2824, 12-cv~2825
`
`Dear Craig:
`
`We have reviewed B.E. Technology’s Initial Infringement Contentions dated January 7,
`2013. For the reasons discussed below, the contentions fail to satisfy the requirements of Local
`Patent Rule 3.1.
`
`Rule 3.} requires that B.E. Teclmology’s Initial Infringement Contentions contain a chart
`identifiiing “specifically where each limitation of each asserted ciaim is found within each
`Accused Instrumentality.” However, for several of the elements of the asserted claims, B.E.
`Technology failed to do that for each and every Accused Instrumentality. Specifically, for
`virtualiy every limitation, B.E. Technology included a series of “screen shots” without any
`further explanation as to_ where each limitation is found, For example, and without limitation, the
`chart comparing claim 2 of the ’290 to the Samsung Acclaim smartphones is deficient for at least
`the following reasons:
`
`0
`
`0
`
`0
`
`For element (a) of claim 2, the chart merely states in conclusory fashion that “{t]he
`Samsung Acclaim smartphone includes a non»v0latile data storage device,” followed by a
`series of screen shots of a Samsung phone. The screen shots fail to identify what it is
`about the phone that constitutes a non—volatile data storage device.
`
`For element (c) of claim 2, while the chart identifies several aileged programs followed
`once again by a series of screen shots, it fails to identify, without limitation, “a number of
`user—se1ectable items dispiayed in [the graphical user interface],” “a link to an
`information resource accessible via the network,” and how each program “is operable
`upon execution and in response to selection by a user of one of said items to access the
`associated information resource over the network.”
`
`For element (cl), the chart faiis to identify, without limitation, the programs being
`operable “to display a user—selectable item for user links contained within the user
`profile” and “in response to selection by a user of one of the user links to access the tile
`IBIT A
`
`t
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID 484
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 2 of 3 Page|D 484
`
`Craig R. Kaufinan
`Janauary I8, 2013
`' Fags 2
`
`associated with the selected user link from the user library associated with the received
`user profile.” The series of screen shots included in the chart are wholly insufficient.
`
`in addition, we object to BE. Technology’s.assertions relating to the doctrine of
`equivalents. For virtually every claim element, B.E. Technology included an alternative
`boilerplate argument that the element is met under the doctrine of equivalents. B.E.
`Technology’s assertions of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents are improper for at *
`least two reasons. First, it is improper to assert the doctrine of equivalents as an alternative
`position since an element can only appear in an accused device either literally or under the
`doctrine of equivalents. It is clear that 13.13. Technology is attempting to preserve a doctrine of
`equivalents argument in the event it fails to establish literal infringement. However, such an
`argument cannot be preserveclsimply by cutting and pasting a boilerplate statement into a claim
`chart. Second, B.E. Technology did not provide any explanation as to what feature(s) of each
`Accused lnstrumentality constitutes an equivalent for any claim element, thereby violating Local
`Patent Rule 3.1 for the same reasons as discussed above.
`
`Moreover, the contentions served by 13.13. Technology identify as accused products
`mobile phones (and possibly other product categories) that are not sold in the United States and
`that cannot form the basis of a claim of infringement of a US. patent. These include, without
`limitation, the Galaxy Ace, Galaxy Fit, Galaxy Gio, Galaxy Mini, Galaxy Pocket Duos, Galaxy
`Pocket and Galaxy S Advance. It is possible that other products were also misidentified, but it is
`difficult for us to make that determination since the contentions identify product names without
`providing any model numbers and Samsung sells products in the U.S. that share the names as
`their overseas counterparts but have different model numbers. The contentions must therefore be
`amended to both delete products not sold in the US. and identify model numbers of accused
`products.
`
`For at least these reasons, B.E. Technology has failed to comply with Local Patent Rule
`3.1. Such failure will make it difficult to impossible for Samsung toprepare its Initial Non-
`infringenient Contentions and produce the accompanying documents as required by Local Patent
`Rules 3.3 and 3.4. Therefore, we request that B.E. Technology confirm by Januaigy 23, 2013 that
`(a) it will be supplementing its contentions to address the issues mentioned above and otherwise
`comply with Rule 3.1 and (b) it has no objection to an extension of time for Samsung to comply
`with the requirements of Rules 3.3 and 3.4 up to and including the deadline for Samsung to serve
`its invalidity and Unenforceability Contentions.
`
`Please call us if you have any questions.
`
`. Sincerely, Jonathan E. Nelson
`
`JBN:mv
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02825-JPM-tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID 485
`Case 2:12—cv—O2825—JPM—tmp Document 49-1 Filed 07/15/13 Page 3 of 3 Page|D 485
`
`Craig R. Kaufman
`Janauary 18,2013 ‘
`Page 3
`
`cc:
`
`BeTechFTKALL@ftkEaw.com (Via email)
`Joshua Raskin, Esq. (via email)
`Rich Pettus, Esq. (via email)
`Justin MacLean, Esq. (via email)
`
`1 1530937.!