`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 163-6 Filed 06/10/14 Page 1 of 3 Page|D #: 4944
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`Case No. 12-CV-00799-LED
`
`INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. and
`
`MICRO MOTION INC., USA,
`
`Defendants,
`
`and
`
`MICRO MOTION INC., USA,
`
`Counterclaim-Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Counterclaim-Defendant.
`
`,
`
`DECLARATION OF RICHARD MAGINNIS
`
`1, Richard Maginnis, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am an engineer at Micro Motion.
`
`I began working at Micro Motion on
`
`September 30, 1997. At the time, I was hired to commercialize a new Coriolis flowrneter
`
`product using digital signal processing (DSP) technology.
`
`I knew that others at Micro Motion
`
`had previously worked on this DSP development.
`
`2.
`
`When I spoke with Micro Motion’s attorneys in November of 2012, I did not
`
`remember or appreciate that the work that had been done prior to my employment at Micro
`
`Motion involved digital signal processing to generate a drive signal.
`
`
`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 163-6 Filed 06/10/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 4945
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 163-6 Filed 06/10/14 Page 2 of 3 Page|D #: 4945
`
`3.
`
`I met with Micro Motion’s attorneys again on April 22, 2014 to discuss upcoming
`
`depositions. During the course of that interview, I remembered certain aspects of the work that
`
`preceded my employment at Micro Motion.
`
`I did some subsequent investigation and located a
`
`schematic that predated my employment. The work in the schematic was performed at Micro
`
`Motion by Tony Pankratz (a Micro Motion employee) and Howard Derby (a former consultant
`
`for Micro Motion).
`
`4.
`
`In 1998, after I began my employment at Micro Motion, I created a prototype of
`
`the DSP product I was working on. After the initial meeting on April 22, 2014, I searched for
`
`and located that prototype.
`
`I also remembered that there had been a prior prototype, referred to
`
`as the “fishbowl,” although I did not know then or now the details of the fishbowl prototype.
`
`5.
`
`I did not remember in November 2012 or thereafter, until I looked at the 1996
`
`schematic in April of 2014, that Derby or Pankratz had designed controller circuitry before my
`
`employment that used digitai signal processing to generate or control a drive signal.
`
`6.
`
`I did not remember in November 2012 or thereafter, until 1 reviewed documents
`
`in April of 2014, that Derby or Pankratz had written code for a digital controller for a ilowmeter
`
`prior to my employment that used digital signal processing to generate or control a drive signal.
`
`'2’.
`
`I did not remember in November 2012, or thereafter, until I reviewed documents
`
`in April of 2014, that Derby or Pankratz had actually built a digital controller for a flowmeter
`
`prior to my employment that used digital signal processing to generate or control a drive signal.
`
`
`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 163-6 Filed 06/10/14 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 4946
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 163-6 Filed 06/10/14 Page 3 of 3 Page|D #: 4946
`
`8.
`
`I did not know, and I did not remember in November 2012,
`
`that Derby or
`
`Pankratz had tested a digital controller for a flowmeter prior to my employment that used digital
`
`signal processing to generate or control a drive signal.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`Dated: June 4, 2014
` ‘chard Magi-nnrs
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
