`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 106-5 Filed 01/31/14 Page 1 of 2 Page|D #: 2704
`
`EXHIBIT C
`
`
`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 106-5 Filed 01/31/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2705
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 106-5 Filed 01/31/14 Page 2 of 2 PagelD #: 2705
`
`Hansen, Linda E.B.
`
`From:
`
`Sent:
`To:
`Subject:
`
`Nick:
`
`Hansen, Linda EB.
`
`Monday, March 18, 2013 3:01 PM
`Papastavros, Nick
`Invensys v. Micro Motion — claim against Emerson
`
`As you saw in the declarations of Dr. Ledford and Mr. Dudiak filed in support of Emerson's Notice of
`Joinder (Docket No. 30), Emerson is not involved with the selection or design of features used in
`Micro Motion‘s Coriiolis flow meters. Although Micro Motion is a wholly owned subsidiary of
`Emerson, Emerson takes no role in the development of the accused products.
`
`Case law indicates that a parent corporation is not responsible for torts of its subsidiary under such
`circumstances. Advertisements bearing the logo of Emerson Process Management do not change
`that fact.
`
`Please let me know, by March 29, whether lnvensys wilt dismiss the allegations against Emerson in
`this case.
`If lnvensys does not do so, Emerson will proceed with a motion for summaryjudgment,
`and will request costs associated with the motion.
`
`If you have any questions, please let me know.
`
`Linda
`
`|]1ll1:\'Cll
`["._H.
`J.inLi;i
`["::lL‘\' CQ J.'.l1'Li{1L'1' 1.3.!‘
`“'77 l"..
`\X-'1:<uit1s111 .\vr:.
`.'\l i|x\'-.iLi]iu', W"! 53333
`
`I.’_ulircr.‘!ji
`-1 E-l_2‘)7-7.3).":-it’:
`-l I-i.2‘J_ -1-‘JUU {I-.ll\J}