Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 84-4 Filed 02/12/25 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:
`5911
`
`Exhibit 3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 84-4 Filed 02/12/25 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:
`5912
`
`
`
`August 6, 2024
`
`
`Carder W. Brooks
`direct 817.806.3814
`carder@nelbum.com
`
`
`
`Via E-Mail (jkaempf@fenwick.com)
`Jessica Kaempf
`Fenwick & West LLP
`401 Union St.
`Seattle, WA 98101
`
`
`R2 Solutions LLC v. Databricks, Inc.
`No. 4:23-cv-01147-ALM (E.D. Tex.)
`
`Re:
`
`
`Jessica:
`
`We are in receipt of Databricks’ document production served on July 16. As you know,
`P.R. 3-4 required Databricks to “produce or make available for inspection and copying …
`[s]ource code, specifications, schematics, flow charts, artwork, formulas, or other documentation
`sufficient to show the operation of any aspects or elements of [the] Accused Instrumentalit[ies]
`identified by the patent claimant in its P.R. 3-1(c) chart[s]….” P.R. 3-4(a).
`
`While it appears that Databricks has produced some open-source code for Spark and
`some alleged prior art systems, it does not appear that Databricks has produced any of its own
`source code. Please confirm that Databricks will make its source code available for inspection by
`no later than Tuesday, August 13. Otherwise, please let us know your availability to meet and
`confer in advance of bringing this issue to the Court.
`
`Finally, as you consider Databricks’ document collection and production deficiencies,
`please note the following categories of documents that R2 expects to see. The list below is not
`meant to be exhaustive; rather, R2 expects to receive a copy of “all documents, electronically
`stored information, and tangible things that are in the possession, custody, or control of
`[Databricks] relevant to the claims or defenses of any party.” See Order Governing Proceedings
`(ECF 18). As used herein, the term “document” includes all of the types of information described
`in FRCP 34, and the term “Databricks” includes Databricks and its affiliates.
`
`Categories
`
`1. Computer code (compiled or not, in any language, including SQL) for each Accused
`Instrumentality.
`
`2. All documents describing, illustrating, and/or summarizing computer code responsive
`to Category 1, above.
`
`3.
`
`For each Accused Instrumentality:
`
`
`
`3131 West 7th . Suite 300 . Fort Worth TX 76107 . nelbum.com
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 84-4 Filed 02/12/25 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:
`5913
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`a. Documents sufficient to identify and fully describe the technical features,
`capabilities, and operation of the instrumentality;
`
`b. Schematics, block diagrams, and device specification documents sufficient to
`identify and fully describe the hardware (e.g., processors, display, memory,
`buses, etc.) and software (e.g., APIs, software modules, GUIs, machine
`learning modules, etc.) associated with the instrumentality;
`
`c. Documents sufficient to identify all third parties providing Databricks with
`hardware or software associated with the instrumentality;
`
`d. Documents sufficient to identify the cost(s) associated with each hardware and
`software component of the instrumentality;
`
`e. All documents describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking,
`valuing, or otherwise related to the analytics, capabilities, or operation of the
`instrumentality;
`
`f. All documents (including user manuals, online tutorials, etc.) that provide
`instructions regarding use of the instrumentality;
`
`g. Documents sufficient to show the sales, revenues, costs, margins, and profits
`associated with the instrumentality; and
`
`h. All documents related to the marketing of the instrumentality.
`
`4. Documents sufficient to identify and fully describe any testing, evaluation, or analysis
`of any Accused Instrumentality performed by Databricks or a third party.
`
`5. All documents describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking, valuing,
`or otherwise related to mapping, reducing, joining, merging, or otherwise handling
`data (including “big data”).
`
`6. All documents related to the development or marketing of any applications and/or
`programs related to big data analytics.
`
`7. All documents describing, evaluating, investigating, comparing, valuing, or otherwise
`relating to the preferences, priorities, and/or factors affecting the purchasing and/or
`platform use decisions of customers, potential customers, or other end users.
`
`8. All documents evidencing or related to market or consumer research regarding any
`Accused Instrumentality.
`
`9. All documents evidencing or related to market or consumer research regarding any
`feature, function, or process identified in, discussed in, or otherwise related to R2
`Solutions’ infringement contentions.
`
`3131 West 7th . Suite 300 . Fort Worth TX 76107 . nelbum.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 84-4 Filed 02/12/25 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:
`5914
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`10. All documents describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking, valuing,
`or otherwise related to the speed, performance, throughput, costs, benefits,
`advantages, reliability, and/or efficiency of the Accused Instrumentalities.
`
`11. All documents describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking, valuing,
`or otherwise related to the impact of any feature identified or discussed in R2
`Solutions’ infringement contentions on the speed, performance, throughput, costs,
`benefits, advantages, reliability, and/or efficiency of a network or network device.
`
`12. All documents describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking, valuing,
`or otherwise related to any technical standard, feature, or capability identified in R2
`Solutions’ infringement contentions.
`
`13. All documents related to participation by Databricks in any patent pool, including all
`documents related to any license payments made or received from any such patent
`pool, all agreements between Databricks and the patent pool, and all documents
`describing, evaluating, analyzing, comparing, benchmarking, valuing, or otherwise
`related to any patents subject to the patent pool.
`
`14. All patent license agreements, technology license agreements, and distribution
`agreements, between Databricks and any third-party related to any Accused
`Instrumentality.
`
`15. All patent purchase agreements that involve the acquisition or sale of a patent or
`patents pertaining to any Accused Instrumentality.
`
`16. All documents that mention or relate to R2 Solutions, or its predecessor, Excalibur IP,
`LLC.
`
`17. All documents that mention or relate to any patent asserted in this lawsuit or any
`patent related to a patent asserted in this lawsuit.
`
`18. All documents that mention or relate to any aspect of any other R2 Solutions lawsuit.
`
`19. All documents that mention or relate to any inter partes review petition or proceeding
`for any patent asserted or controlled by R2 Solutions.
`
`20. All documents that mention or relate to R2 Solutions, Yahoo Inc., Excalibur IP, LLC,
`Acacia Research Corporation, or Acacia Research Group and are related to or
`concern the patents asserted in this lawsuit, any other R2 Solutions lawsuit, and/or the
`patent portfolio to which the asserted patents belong.
`
`21. Documents sufficient to identify all individuals employed by Databricks who were, or
`are, involved in designing, developing, testing, using, or implementing any feature,
`function, activity, or process mentioned in R2 Solutions’ infringement contentions.
`
`3131 West 7th . Suite 300 . Fort Worth TX 76107 . nelbum.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 84-4 Filed 02/12/25 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:
`5915
`
`Page 4
`
`
`
`22. Documents identifying all third parties assisting Databricks in designing, developing,
`testing, using, or implementing any feature, function, activity, or process mentioned
`in R2 Solutions’ infringement contentions.
`
`23. Documents sufficient to identify all individuals employed by Databricks whose job
`requires material interactions with any Accused Instrumentality.
`
`24. Documents provided to Databricks by any third party, or received by Databricks from
`any third party, related to any feature, function, activity, or process referenced in R2
`Solutions’ infringement contentions.
`
`25. All documents responsive to any of R2 Solutions’ interrogatories directed to
`Databricks in this lawsuit.
`
`
`Please feel free to reach out to me by phone or email at any time to discuss these issues.
`Otherwise, we look forward to hearing from you with confirmation that R2 can expect
`Databricks’ code to be made available by no later than Tuesday, August 13, or with proposed
`dates for the parties to meet and confer in advance of raising this issue with the Court.
`
`
`Regards,
`
`Carder W. Brooks
`
`
`
`3131 West 7th . Suite 300 . Fort Worth TX 76107 . nelbum.com
`
`
`
`
