Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 9731
`
`Exhibit 9
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 9732
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC., ET AL.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:17-CV-0513-JRG
`(LEAD CASE)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Case No. 2:17-CV-0515-JRG
`(CONSOLIDATED CASE)
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS’ EYES
`ONLY
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC.’S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`PLAINTIFF AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC’S
`FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-10)
`
`Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant LG
`
`Electronics Inc. (“LGEKR” or “Defendant”) by its attorneys hereby provides responses and
`
`objections to Plaintiff AGIS Software Development LLC’s (“AGIS”) First Set of Interrogatories
`
`(Nos. 1-10) (the “Request” or “Interrogatories”).
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`These responses, while based on diligent investigation by LGEKR and its counsel, reflect
`
`only the current status of LGEKR’s knowledge regarding the subjects and information about
`
`which inquiry has been made. LGEKR may not yet fully understand the significance of certain
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 9733
`
`information, or facts, has not yet discovered all information, facts and documents pertinent to
`
`this action, and has not yet identified or located all persons with knowledge or pertinent
`
`information, facts or documents. LGEKR will continue to assess and analyze the facts and
`
`gather and review evidence in connection with this action up to the time of trial.
`
`Therefore, these responses are neither intended as, nor shall in any way be deemed, an
`
`admission or representation that further information or documents relevant to this Request do not
`
`exist. As this action proceeds, LGEKR will discover further documents, facts and other
`
`information. Without in any way obligating itself to do so, LGEKR reserves the right to modify
`
`or supplement its responses herein with such pertinent documents, facts or other information as
`
`subsequently may be discovered. Furthermore, these responses are given without prejudice to
`
`LGEKR’s right to use or rely on at any time, including trial, any subsequently discovered
`
`information, facts or documents, or information or facts omitted from these responses as a result
`
`of mistake, error, oversight or inadvertence. LGEKR further reserves the right to produce
`
`additional documents, facts or information at any time, including trial, and to object on
`
`appropriate grounds to the introduction into evidence of any portion of these responses.
`
`All disclosures made herein are produced strictly pursuant to the stipulated protective
`
`order in this case.
`
`
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`Specific objections to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 are made on an individual basis in the
`
`responses below. In addition to these specific objections, LGEKR makes the following General
`
`Objections to AGIS’s Interrogatory Nos. 1-10, including without limitation the instructions and
`
`definitions set forth therein. These General Objections are hereby incorporated by reference into
`
`the responses to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10. For particular emphasis, LGEKR has, from time to
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 9734
`
`time, expressly included one or more of the General Objections in certain of its responses below.
`
`LGEKR’s response to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 is submitted without prejudice to, and without in
`
`any respect waiving, any General Objections not expressly set forth in a specific response.
`
`Accordingly, the inclusion of any specific objection in response to an interrogatory below is
`
`neither intended as, nor shall in any way be deemed to be, a waiver of any General Objection or
`
`of any other specific objection that may be asserted at a later date. In addition, the failure to
`
`include at this time any General or specific objection to an interrogatory is neither intended as,
`
`nor shall in any way be deemed, a waiver of LGEKR’s right to assert that or any other objection
`
`at a later date.
`
`1.
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they call for the disclosure of
`
`information or the production of documents that are shielded from discovery by attorney-client
`
`privilege, the work product doctrine, or any related joint defense or common interest privilege,
`
`privileges applicable to settlement materials or documents or information which constitute trial
`
`preparation materials, or any other applicable privilege (collectively, “Privileged Information”).
`
`Any statement herein to the effect that LGEKR will provide information in response to an
`
`interrogatory is limited to information that does not fall within the scope of any Privileged
`
`Information.
`
`2.
`
`LGEKR objects to the production of any information or documents to the extent
`
`they include confidential, proprietary, trade secret, private or financial information that is
`
`protected from disclosure by any applicable trade secret or privacy statute or law. LGEKR will
`
`only provide such information pursuant to the confidentiality protections embodied in the
`
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the terms of the protective order entered in this action, and
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 9735
`
`to the extent applicable, with the consent of any third party that may claim confidentiality rights
`
`with respect to information responsive to the interrogatory request.
`
`3.
`
`LGEKR objects to the definition of “LG,” “Defendant,” “You,” and “Your” as
`
`overly broad and unduly burdensome to the extent it includes all predecessors-in-interest,
`
`successors in-interest, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, and entities acting in joint venture,
`
`licensing or partnership relationships with any of the defendants in any country. LGEKR
`
`understands this term to mean LG Electronics, Inc. as the named defendant in the above-
`
`captioned action.
`
`4.
`
`LGEKR objects to the definition of “LG Accused Products” as overly broad and
`
`unduly burdensome to the extent it includes products made, used, sold, offered for sale, or
`
`imported into the United States by entities other than LG Electronics, Inc. LGEKR objects to the
`
`definition of “LG Accused Products” as vague and ambiguous insofar as it is defined to include
`
`products “that incorporate technology as defined and alleged in AGIS’s complaints, infringement
`
`contentions, initial disclosures, and expert reports.” LGEKR further objects to the definition of
`
`“LG Accused Products” as overly broad to the extent that it includes any products or devices
`
`accused of infringing any patent later asserted by Plaintiff in this Action. LGEKR understands
`
`this term to mean only those specific products made, used, sold, offered for sale, or imported into
`
`the United States by LG Electronics, Inc. among those identified by AGIS in its Infringement
`
`Contentions, and that include the Android-based applications or software identified in Plaintiff’s
`
`Infringement Contentions that allow users to utilize forced message alerts or to form groups with
`
`other users such that users may view each other’s locations on a map and engage in
`
`communication.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 9736
`
`5.
`
`LGEKR objects to the definition of “Person(s)” as overly broad to the extent that
`
`it includes other persons or entities outside of the Person’s control. In responding to the
`
`interrogatories, LGEKR understands this term to mean only the persons or entities within the
`
`Person’s control, and with respect to such other persons or entities within the Person’s control,
`
`LGEKR shall only provide relevant information that is accessible by means of the business
`
`relationship with the Person(s).
`
`6.
`
`LGEKR objects to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 to the extent they are overly broad,
`
`unduly burdensome, or seek information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense or
`
`not proportional to the needs of the case.
`
`7.
`
`LGEKR objects to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 to the extent they are vague,
`
`ambiguous, and use unlimited, undefined, subjective, or open-ended terms or phrases.
`
`8.
`
`LGEKR objects to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 to the extent that they are unlimited in
`
`time, including to the extent that they seek information beyond the limitations period applicable
`
`to Plaintiff’s claims.
`
`9.
`
`LGEKR objects to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 to the extent that the purported benefit
`
`of the discovery sought by Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 is outweighed by the burden and expense of
`
`responding to the interrogatory pursuant to Rules 26(b)(1) and 26(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure.
`
`10.
`
`LGEKR objects to Interrogatory Nos. 1-10 to the extent they attempt to impose
`
`burdens on LGEKR inconsistent with, or in excess of, the requirements of the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedures and/or the Local Rules of the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`11.
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they call for information
`
`already in the possession of or equally accessible to AGIS.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 9737
`
`12.
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information that is
`
`not in the possession, custody, or control of LGEKR, and/or purport to call for any description of
`
`documents that LGEKR no longer possesses and/or was under no obligation to maintain. With
`
`respect to documents that were but are no longer in LGEKR’s possession, custody or control,
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek a description of the
`
`circumstances of such loss or destruction of the documents and any efforts to recover such
`
`documents.
`
`13.
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they, including their
`
`subparts, exceed the number of interrogatories that a party is permitted to propound under the
`
`Discovery Order in this action.
`
`14.
`
`LGEKR objects to the Interrogatories as overly burdensome to the extent they
`
`impose requirements for the production of documents beyond LGEKR’s obligations under the
`
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for
`
`the Eastern District of Texas, and/or the Court’s orders. In responding to the Interrogatories,
`
`LGEKR will produce any documents in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d).
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
`
`INTERROGATORIES
`
`Identify all LG Accused Products sold to customers and made available for purchase by
`
`customers in the United States from January 2011 to the present, providing at least the following
`
`information: (i) the internal and external name(s) and model number(s) of the LG Accused
`
`Products; (ii) each Entity to whom the LG Accused Products were offered for sale or sold, and
`
`(iii) the supplier of each LG Accused Product and components thereof, as well as an
`
`identification of which components are supplied by each supplier.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 9738
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
`
`Identify the dates and circumstances under which you first became aware of the Asserted
`
`Patents, the patent applications of the Asserted Patents, and any Related Patent Applications,
`
`including but not limited to: (i) a description of when and how you first became aware of the
`
`Asserted Patents (including awareness through reference or citation to the Asserted Patents), the
`
`patent applications of the Asserted Patents, and any Related Patent Applications; (ii) an
`
`identification of those Persons who first became aware of the Asserted Patents, the patent
`
`applications of the Asserted Patents, and any Related Patent Applications; and (iii) a description
`
`of the actions taken by Defendants in response to becoming aware of the Asserted Patents, the
`
`patent applications of the Asserted Patents, and any Related Patent Applications.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
`
`LGEKR incorporates by reference its General Objections as if fully set forth herein.
`
`First, LGEKR objects to this interrogatory as unduly burdensome to the extent that it would
`
`require LGEKR, a large multinational company, to inquire into the knowledge of thousands of
`
`officers, directors, trustees, employees, agents, consultants, attorneys and patent agents. Second,
`
`LGEKR objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information about awareness of
`
`“Related Patent Applications” because Related Patent Applications are not relevant to any
`
`party’s claim or defense in this case. Third, LGEKR objects to this interrogatory to the extent it
`
`is premature in that discovery is ongoing. LGEKR has not completed its investigation of the
`
`facts related to this case. Fourth, LGEKR further objects to the extent this interrogatory seeks
`
`Privileged Information. Fifth, LGEKR objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for the
`
`production of confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information that is protected from
`
`disclosure by any applicable trade secret or privacy statute or law or confidentiality agreement.
`
`
`
`43
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 9739
`
`Subject to the foregoing general and specific objections, LGEKR responds as follows:
`
`LGEKR will conduct a reasonable investigation to determine whether its employees responsible
`
`for the accused functionality identified in Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions in the LG
`
`Accused Products were aware of the Asserted Patents or the patent applications of the Asserted
`
`Patents. As discovery is just commencing and LGEKR’s investigation is ongoing, LGEKR will
`
`supplement this response upon completion of its investigations.
`
`06/05/18 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
`
`Subject to and without waiving LGEKR’s previous objections and responses, LGEKR
`
`provides the following supplemental response: Based upon a reasonable investigation, LGEKR
`
`first became aware of the Asserted Patents, the patent applications of the Asserted Patents, and
`
`any Related Patent Applications when AGIS filed the Complaint in This Action, on June 21,
`
`2017.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
`
`For each Asserted Patent, Identify and describe in detail each allegedly design-around
`
`and/or non-infringing alternative that you contend can be used as an alternative to each Asserted
`
`Patent, including but not limited to: (i) a description of each alleged design-around and/or non-
`
`infringing alternative; (ii) a description of when and how each alleged design around and/or non-
`
`infringing alternative was developed (if applicable); (iii) the identity of individuals involved in
`
`developing each alleged design around and/or non-infringing alternative (if applicable),
`
`including their titles and departments if they are current or former employees of Defendants; (iv)
`
`dates when each alleged design around and/or non-infringing alternative was incorporated in
`
`your products (if applicable); (v) costs associated with developing and implementing each
`
`design-around and/or alleged non-infringing alternative; and (vi) steps and the time required to
`
`
`
`44
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 10 of 12 PageID #: 9740
`
`develop and implement each alleged design-around and/or non-infringing alternative.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
`
`LGEKR incorporates by reference its General Objections as if fully set forth herein.
`
`First, LGEKR objects to this interrogatory as premature since the parties’ respective positions on
`
`the construction of various claim elements, limitations, and terms are not yet known. Second,
`
`LGEKR objects to this interrogatory as premature because discovery has just commenced and
`
`the interrogatory seeks to elicit expert testimony prior to the date to be provided in the case
`
`schedule. Third, LGEKR further objects to the extent this interrogatory seeks Privileged
`
`Information. Fourth, LGEKR objects that this interrogatory is overly broad and unduly
`
`burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible
`
`evidence. Fifth, LGEKR objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for the production of
`
`confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information that is protected from disclosure by any
`
`applicable trade secret or privacy statute or law or confidentiality agreement.
`
`No further response from LGEKR is needed at this time.
`
`06/05/18 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
`
`Subject to and without waiving LGEKR’s previous objections and responses, LGEKR
`
`provides the following supplemental response: The alleged infringements identified in AGIS’s
`
`P.R. 3-1(c) chart relates exclusively to software licensed to LGEKR by Google. Source code for
`
`the accused applications is not within LGEKR’s possession, custody, or control. In addition,
`
`LGEKR does not have the authority to modify Google’s source code for the accused applications
`
`or the means to modify Google’s source code, as it is supplied by Google in a binary code
`
`format. Therefore, there has been no design-around by LGEKR.
`
`
`
`
`
`45
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 9741
`
`Dated: December 27, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ Mark Mann
`Mark Mann
`SBN: 12926150
`mark@themannfirm.com
`G. Blake Thompson
`SBN: 24042033
`blake@themannfirm.com
`MANN TINDEL THOMPSON
`300 West Main Street
`Henderson, Texas 75652
`Tel: 903-657-8540
`
`Michael A. Berta
`Michael.berta@apks.com
`ARNOLD & PORTER
`KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`Three Embarcadero Center
`10th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111-4024
`Tel: 415-471-3000
`
`James S. Blackburn
`James.blackburn@apks.com
`Nicholas H. Lee
`Nicholas.lee@apks.com
`ARNOLD & PORTER
`KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`777 South Figueroa Street
`44th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90017-5844
`Tel: 213-243-4000
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`
`
`
`46
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 135-13 Filed 01/29/19 Page 12 of 12 PageID #: 9742
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have
`
`consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via electronic mail
`
`on December 27, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Bonnie Phan
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Bonnie Phan
`ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`3000 El Camino Real
`Five Palo Alto Square, Suite 500
`Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
`Tel: 1 650.319.4543
`
`47
`
`