`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 8653
`
`(cid:3)
`(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:59)(cid:43)(cid:44)(cid:37)(cid:44)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:25)(cid:3)
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 8654
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`HTC CORPORATION,
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:17-CV-0514-JRG
`(LEAD CASE)
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`PLAINTIFF AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC’S OBJECTIONS AND
`RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT HTC CORPORATION’S
`FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION TO PLAINTIFF (NOS. 1-38)
`AND OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`DEFENDANT HTC CORPORATION’S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
`RELATING TO AUTHENTICATION AND PRIOR ART (NOS. A1-A185)
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Defendant.
`
`Procedure, Plaintiff AGIS Software Development LLC (“AGIS” or “Plaintiff”) hereby responds
`
`to Defendant HTC Corporation’s (“HTC” or “Defendant”) First Set of Requests to Admission to
`
`Plaintiff (Nos. 1-38) and Requests Relating to Authentication and Prior Art (Nos. A1-A185) in
`
`writing, under oath, and in accordance with the following definitions and instructions, within
`
`thirty (30) days of the date of service, November 7, 2018, thereof.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`AGIS incorporates by reference the general and specific objections in AGIS’s Objections
`
`and Responses to HTC Corporation’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff (Nos. 1-15), served
`
`June 18, 2018; and AGIS’s First Supplemental Objections and Responses to HTC Corporation’s
`
`First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff (Nos. 1-15), served August 17, 2018, and further objects
`
`as follows:
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 8655
`
`Each of the following General Objections is incorporated into each specific response
`
`below. The recitation of one or more specific objection in any particular Response is not to be
`
`construed as a waiver of any applicable General Objection. The responses are made subject to
`
`and in reliance on the General Objections set forth below:
`
`AGIS objects to Defendant’s definition of “AGIS,” “You,” and “Your” to the extent that
`
`those definitions include any persons or entities other than AGIS Software Development LLC,
`
`which are not parties to this action.
`
`AGIS objects to Defendant’s definition of “Advanced Ground Information Systems,
`
`Inc.,” “AGIS Inc.,” and “AGIS FL” to the extent that those definitions include any persons or
`
`entities other than AGIS Inc. which are not parties to this action.
`
`AGIS objects to Defendant’s definition of “AGIS Holdings, Inc.,” and “AGIS Holdings”
`
`to the extent that those definitions include any persons or entities other than AGIS Holdings,
`
`which are not parties to this action.
`
`AGIS objects to Defendant’s definition of “AGIS’s Companies” to the extent that those
`
`definitions include any persons or entities other than AGIS Holdings, which are not parties to
`
`this action.
`
`AGIS objects to the definition of “Document,” to the extent it imposes a burden beyond
`
`the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the E.D. Tex. Local Rules, and the
`
`orders of the Court.
`
`AGIS objects to the definition of “Including,” to the extent it imposes a burden beyond
`
`the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the E.D. Tex. Local Rules, and the
`
`orders of the Court.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 8656
`
`AGIS objects to the Definitions and Instructions to the extent that they call for the
`
`production of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product
`
`doctrine, and any other applicable privileges and immunities.
`
`AGIS objects to the Requests for Admission to the extent that they seek admissions
`
`beyond the truth about fact, the application of law to facts, or opinions about either, as permitted
`
`by Fed. R. Civ. P. 36.
`
`AGIS objects to the Requests for Admission to the extent that they call for a legal
`
`conclusion.
`
`The Definitions, Instructions, and Requests for Admission are unreasonably cumulative
`
`and duplicative and seek the discovery of information that can be obtained from some other
`
`source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive; seek the discovery of
`
`information that Defendant has already obtained by discovery in this action; seek discovery that
`
`is not relevant to any party’s claims or defenses; and seek discovery, the burden and expense of
`
`which is not proportional to the needs of this case, considering the importance of the issues at
`
`stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information,
`
`the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the
`
`burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.
`
`SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
`HTC CORPORATION’S FIRST SET OF
`REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION TO PLAINTIFF (NOS. 1-38)
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 1
`
`Admit that no representative from AGIS sent notice to HTC Corporation identifying any
`of the Patents-in-Suit prior to AGIS’s filing of its complaint alleging patent infringement against
`HTC Corporation (filed on June 21, 2017).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 1:
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 8657
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. Subject to the foregoing
`
`general and specific objections, AGIS responds as follows:
`
`Admitted.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 2
`
`Admit that no representative from any of AGIS’s companies sent notice to HTC
`Corporation identifying any of the Patents-in-Suit prior to AGIS’s filing of its complaint alleging
`patent infringement against HTC Corporation (filed on June 21, 2017).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 2:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. AGIS objects to this Request
`
`to the extent it seeks information regarding an entity other than AGIS Software Development
`
`LLC. Accordingly, due to the foregoing general and specific objections, AGIS cannot admit or
`
`deny this request.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 3
`
`Admit that no representative from any of AGIS’s companies sent notice to HTC
`Corporation identifying any patent assigned to any of AGIS’s Companies prior to AGIS’s filing
`of its complaint alleging patent infringement against HTC Corporation (filed on June 21, 2017).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 3:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. AGIS objects to this Request
`
`to the extent it seeks information regarding an entity other than AGIS Software Development
`
`LLC. Accordingly, due to the foregoing general and specific objections, AGIS cannot admit or
`
`deny this request.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 4
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 8658
`
`Admit that HTC Corporation did not receive notice of any of the Patents-in-Suit prior to
`AGIS’s filing of its complaint alleging patent infringement against HTC Corporation (filed on
`June 21, 2017).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 4:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. AGIS objects to this Request
`
`to the extent it seeks information regarding an entity other than AGIS Software Development
`
`LLC. AGIS objects to this Request to the extent it seeks information not in the possession of
`
`AGIS. AGIS objects as this request seeks information outside the care custody and control of
`
`AGIS. Accordingly, due to the foregoing general and specific objections, AGIS cannot admit or
`
`deny this request.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 5
`
`Admit that HTC Corporation did not receive notice alleging that HTC Corporation
`infringes any of the Patents-in-Suit prior to AGIS’s filing of its complaint alleging patent
`infringement against HTC Corporation (filed on June 21, 2017).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 5:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. AGIS objects to this Request
`
`to the extent it seeks information regarding an entity other than AGIS Software Development
`
`LLC. AGIS objects to this Request to the extent it seeks information not in the possession of
`
`AGIS. AGIS objects as this request seeks information outside the care, custody and control of
`
`AGIS. Accordingly, due to the foregoing general and specific objections, AGIS cannot admit or
`
`deny this request.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 8659
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 6
`
`Admit that an attorney representing the ’838 patent applicant stated to the United States
`Patent Office that “it is understood that the present application will be examined under the post-
`AIA, first-to-file provisions of the patent laws” in the prosecution of the ’838 patent (App. No.
`14/529978) in an April 25, 2016 Applicant Amendment.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 6:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. Subject to the foregoing
`
`general and specific objections, AGIS responds as follows:
`
`Admitted as to the content of the excerpt of the document, however, the beginning of the
`
`same paragraph states that “[t]he Office Action (p. 2) states that ‘[t]he present application is
`
`being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions’ of the patent laws.”
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 7
`
`Admit that no representative from any of AGIS’s Companies made a representation to the
`United States Patent Office—after the statement identified in Request for Admission No. 6—that
`the ’838 patent should not be subject to the post-AIA, first-to-file provisions of the America
`Invents Act.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 7:
`
`AGIS objects to this Request on the grounds set forth in its General Objections above,
`
`and hereby incorporates these references as if fully set forth herein. AGIS objects to this Request
`
`to the extent it seeks information regarding an entity other than AGIS Software Development
`
`LLC. Accordingly, due to the foregoing general and specific objections, AGIS cannot admit or
`
`deny this request.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 8
`
`Admit that an attorney representing the ’055 patent applicant stated to the United States
`Patent Office that “it is understood that the present application will be examined under the post-
`AIA, first-to-file provisions of the patent laws” in the prosecution of the ’055 patent (App. No.
`14/695233) in an October 30, 2015 Applicant Amendment.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 124-8 Filed 01/28/19 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 8660
`
`AGIS has insufficient information to admit or deny this request.
`
`
`
`Dated: December 7, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`As to Objections,
`
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`
` /s/ Vincent J. Rubino III
`
`
`
`Alfred R. Fabricant
`N.Y. Bar No. 2219392
`Email: afabricant@brownrudnick.com
`Lawrence C. Drucker
`NY Bar No. 2303089
`Email: ldrucker@brownrudnick.com
`Peter Lambrianakos
`N.Y. Bar No. 2894392
`Email: plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`Vincent J. Rubino, III
`N.Y. Bar No. 4557435
`Email: vrubino@brownrudnick.com
`Alessandra C. Messing
`NY Bar No. 5040019
`Email: amessing@brownrudnick.com
`Shahar Harel
`NY Bar No. 4573192
`Email: sharel@brownrudnick.com
`John A. Rubino
`NY Bar No. 5020797
`Email: jrubino@brownrudnick.com
`Enrique W. Iturralde
`NY Bar No. 5526280
`Email: eiturralde@brownrudnick.com
`Daniel J. Shea, Jr.
`NY Bar No. 5430558
`Email: dshea@brownrudnick.com
`Justine Minseon Park
`NY Bar No. 5604483
`Email: apark@brownrudnick.com
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`7 Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: 212-209-4800
`Facsimile: 212-209-4801
`
`Samuel F. Baxter
`
`
`
`103
`
`