Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:
`6478
`
`Exhibit B
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:
`6479
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`SHERMAN DIVISION
`
`
`
`R2 SOLUTIONS LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATABRICKS, INC.,
`
`
`Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-01147-ALM
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT DATABRICKS, INC.’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`PLAINTIFF R2 SOLUTIONS LLC’S FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
`(NOS. 21–35)
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 33, Defendant Databricks, Inc.
`
`(“Databricks”) hereby objects and responds to Plaintiff R2 Solutions LLC’s (“R2”) Fourth Set of
`
`Interrogatories (Nos. 21–35) as follows. Discovery is ongoing, and Databricks reserves the right
`
`to supplement its responses to these interrogatories based on the information produced during
`
`discovery in this matter.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`Databricks makes the following general objections with respect to each and every
`
`interrogatory whether or not specifically identified in response thereto. To the extent any of these
`
`general objections are not raised in any particular response, Databricks does not waive those
`
`objections.
`
`1.
`
`Databricks objects to the “Definitions” and “Instructions” set forth in the
`
`interrogatories to the extent they purport to impose greater obligations on Databricks than those
`
`contemplated or required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the local rules or default
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:
`6480
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 33:
`
`For each Databricks SKU, describe in detail Databricks’ revenue and profits attributable
`
`to, and the DBUs consumed by, such SKU on a monthly, quarterly, and yearly basis since
`
`December 2017.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 33:
`
`Databricks incorporates the general objections above by reference as if set forth here in
`
`full.
`
`Databricks objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad and irrelevant because it is not limited
`
`to the relevant time period or geographic area. As such, the information is not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case and the burden and/or expense of the requested discovery exceeds the likely
`
`benefit.
`
`Databricks objects to this Interrogatory as vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
`
`burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case as to the terms “revenue and profits
`
`attributable to” and “DBUs consumed by.”
`
`Databricks objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly burdensome, not relevant and
`
`not proportional to the needs of the case with respect to the phrases “for each Databricks SKU.”
`
`Databricks further objects to this Interrogatory as seeking information regarding “each Databricks
`
`SKU,” some of which are not relevant to any asserted claim or defense in this action. Databricks
`
`specifically objects to the extent R2 seeks information regarding SKUs that are not relevant to the
`
`accused features or functionalities.
`
`Databricks further objects to the term “SKU” as vague and ambiguous. Databricks further
`
`objects to this definition to the extent it includes information regarding instrumentalities and
`
`features that are not accused of infringement in this action or that have not been released.
`
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:
`6481
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Databricks objects to this definition to the extent that R2 purports to seek information regarding
`
`instrumentalities and features that are not specifically identified as accused of infringing in the
`
`operative complaint and/or in R2’s preliminary or supplemental infringement contentions.
`
`Databricks will interpret this term as referring only to the specific functionality of the specific
`
`instrumentalities that R2 accuses in its infringement contentions but does so without waiver of the
`
`above objections.
`
`Databricks objects to this Interrogatory as unduly burdensome and not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case to the extent the information sought is not known or regularly kept in Databricks’
`
`ordinary course of business.
`
`Databricks objects to this Interrogatory as unduly burdensome and not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case because
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Databricks objects to this interrogatory as seeking expert testimony, particularly to the
`
`extent it seeks information or data “attributable” to a particular feature.
`
`Subject to and without waiving the foregoing, Databricks responds as follows:
`
`Databricks is willing to meet and confer to understand the relevance of the information R2
`
`requests and the appropriate scope of such information, if any.
`
`Investigation and discovery are ongoing, and Databricks reserves the right to supplement,
`
`amend, or modify its response to this Interrogatory as appropriate.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 34:
`
`For each Databricks SKU, describe in detail the historical pricing of such SKU since
`
`December 2017.
`
`
`
`25
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:
`6482
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Dated: January 24, 2025
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ Jessica M. Kaempf
`Michael J. Sacksteder
`CA Bar No. 191605 (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Email: msacksteder@fenwick.com
`Gregory Sefian
`CA Bar No. 341802 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`Email: gsefian@fenwick.com
`S. Emma Lee
`CA Bar No. 344074 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`Email: emma.lee@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`555 California Street, 12th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Telephone:
`415.875.2300
`Facsimile:
`415.281.1350
`
`Dargaye Churnet
`CA Bar No. 303659 (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Email: dchurnet@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`730 Arizona Ave, 1st Floor
`Santa Monica, CA 90401
`Telephone:
`310.434.5400
`Facsimile:
`650.938.5200
`
`Vigen Salmastlian
`CA Bar No. 276846 (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Email: vsalmastlian@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`801 California Street,
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`Telephone:
`650.988.8500
`Facsimile:
`650.938.5200
`
`
`
`
`29
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:
`6483
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`Jessica M. Kaempf
`WA Bar No. 51666 (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Email: jkaempf@fenwick.com
`Jonathan G. Tamimi
`WA Bar No. 54858 (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Email: jtamimi@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`401 Union Street, 5th Floor
`Seattle, WA 98101
`Telephone:
`206.389.4510
`Facsimile:
`206.389.4511
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`Databricks Inc.
`
`
`
`30
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 4:23-cv-01147-ALM Document 91-3 Filed 02/20/25 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:
`6484
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who consented to electronic service are being
`
`served with a copy of this document via electronic mail per Local Rule CV-5 on January 24, 2025.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Hannah S. Reid
`Hannah S. Reid
`
`31
`
`
`
`
`
`
