Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 5269
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 1 of 9 Page|D #: 5269
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`§ § § § § § § §
`
`§ §
`
`§ §
`
`§ Case No. 6:12-cv-799
`§.
`
`§ §
`
`§ §
`
`§ §
`
`§ §
`
`§ §
`
`INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. and
`
`MICRO MOTION INC., USA,
`
`Defendants,
`
`and
`
`MICRO MOTION INC., USA,
`
`Counterclaim-Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`C0unterclaim—Defendant.
`
`LETTER OF REQUEST TO THE CENTRAL AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED
`KINGDOM FOR INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE PURSUANT
`TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 18 MARCH 1970 ON THE TAKING OF
`EVIDENCE ABROAD IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 5270
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 2 of 9 Page|D #: 5270
`
`Pursuant to Article 3 of the Hague Convention of March 18, 1970 on the Taking of
`
`Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters,
`
`the undersigned applicant submits this
`
`Request on behalf of Emerson Electric Co. and Micro Motion, Inc. in the above-captioned case.
`
`The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas presents its compliments to the
`
`judicial authorities of the United Kingdom and requests international judicial assistance to obtain
`
`evidence, as detailed herein, to be used in a civil proceeding before this Court.
`
`i.
`
`Sender:
`
`The Honorable Leonard Davis
`
`United States District Judge
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
`
`200 W. Ferguson, Third Floor
`Tyler, Texas 75702
`USA.
`
`ii.
`
`Central Authority of the Requested State:
`
`The Senior Master
`
`For the attention of the Foreign Process Section
`Room E16
`
`Royal Courts of Justice
`Strand
`
`London WC2A 2LL United Kingdom
`Telephone: +44 207 947 6691
`Fax: +44 870 324 0025
`
`Email: foreignprocessrcj @hrncts.gsi.gov.ul<
`
`iii.
`
`Person to whom the executed request is to be returned:
`
`Kadie M. Jelenchick, Esq. c/o Foley & Lardner LLP
`777 East Wisconsin Avenue
`
`Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
`U.S.A.
`
`Telephone: (414) 271-2400
`1 Fax: (414) 297-4900
`Email: kj elenchick@foley.com
`
`Emerson Electic C0. ’s and Micro Motion, Inc. ’s US. Legal Representative
`
`on behalf of:
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 5271
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 3 of 9 Page|D #: 5271
`
`The Honorable Leonard Davis
`United States District Judge
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
`200 W. Ferguson, Third Floor
`Tyler, Texas 75702
`USA.
`V
`
`iv.
`
`Specification of the date by which the Requesting Authority requires receipt of the
`response to the Letter of Request:
`
`As soon as practicable.
`
`v.
`
`In conformity with‘Article 3 of the Convention, the undersigned applicant has the
`honor to submit the following:
`
`a.
`
`Requesting judicial authority:
`
`The Honorable Leonard Davis
`.
`United States District Judge
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
`200 W. Ferguson, Third Floor
`Tyler, Texas 75702
`U.S.A.
`
`b.
`
`To the competent authority of:
`
`The Senior Master
`
`For the attention of the Foreign Process Section
`Room E16
`
`Royal Courts of Justice
`Strand
`
`London WC2A 2LL United Kingdom
`Telephone: +44 207 947 6691
`Fax: +44 870 324 0025
`
`Email: foreignprocess.rcj @hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
`
`vi.
`
`Names and addresses of the parties and their representatives:
`
`Party
`
`l
`
`Representatives
`
`Invensys Systems, Inc.
`10900 Equity Drive
`Houston, Texas 77041
`U.S.A.
`
`Claudia Wilson Frost
`Jeffrey L. Johnson
`Dawn M. Jenkins
`DLA PIPER LLP
`
`1000 Louisiana, Suite 2800
`Houston, Texas 77002
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 5272
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 4 of 9 Page|D #: 5272
`
`U.S.A.
`
`Telephone: (713) 425-8400
`Fax: (713) 425-8401
`
`Nicholas G. Papastavros
`Daniel Rosenfeld
`
`DLA PIPER LLP
`
`33 Arch Street, 26th Floor
`Boston, Massachusetts 02110
`U.S.A.
`
`Telephone: (617) 406-6000
`Fax: (617) 406-6100
`
`Todd S. Patterson
`
`Courtney P. Stewart
`DLA PIPER LLP
`
`401 Congress Avenue, Suite 2500
`Austin, Texas 75701
`U.S.A.
`
`Telephone: (512) 457-7017
`Fax: (512) 721-2217
`
`Linda E.B. Hansen
`Richard S. Florsheim
`Jeffrey N. Costakos
`Kadie M. Jelenchick
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`777 East Wisconsin Avenue
`Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
`U.S.A.
`Telephone: (414) 271-2400
`Fax: (414) 297-4900
`
`Guy N. Harrison
`HARRISON LAW FIRM
`
`217 North Center Street
`
`Longview, Texas 75601
`U.S.A.
`
`Telephone: (903) 758-7361
`Fax: (903) 753-9557
`
`Adrian Toutoungi
`EVERSHEDS LLP
`
`1 Wood Street
`
`London EC2V 7WS United Kingdom
`
`7
`
`Emerson Electric Co.
`8000 West Florissant Avenue
`St. Louis, Missouri 63136
`U.S.A.
`
`Micro Motion, Inc.
`7070 Winchester Circle
`Boulder, Colorado 80301
`U.S.A.
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 5273
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 5 of 9 Page|D #: 5273
`
`Telephone: +44 20 7919 4500
`Fax: +44 20 7919 4919
`
`vii.
`
`Nature and purpose of the proceedings and summary of the facts:
`
`This is a patent infringement case pending in the United States District Court for the
`
`Eastern District of Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-00799.
`
`Plaintiff and Counterclaim—Defendant
`
`Invensys Systems,
`
`Inc.
`
`(“Invensys”)
`
`and
`
`Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff Micro Motion, Inc. (“Micro Motion”) manufacture and
`
`sell Coriolis flowmeters, which are devices used to measure the mass of liquid flowing through a
`
`tube. On October 22, 2012, Invensys filed a complaint in the aforementioned District Court
`
`against Micro Motion and its parent company Emerson Electric Co.
`
`(“Emerson”)
`
`for
`
`infringement of four U.S. Patents (Nos. 7,124,646, 7,136,761, 6,311,136, and 7,505,854).
`
`Invensys subsequently amended its complaint to include allegations that Micro Motion and
`
`Emerson infringe three additional U.S. Patents (Nos. 6,754,594, 7,571,062, and 8,000,906 (the
`
`seven patents are referred to collectively as the “Invensys Patents”)). Each of the Invensys
`
`Patents concerns digital flowmeter technology relating to mass measurement devices such as
`
`Coriolis flowmeters.
`
`Micro Motion has asserted counterclaims against Invensys for a declaratory judgment of
`
`non-infringement and invalidity of the Invensys Patents, and a counterclaim for infringement of
`
`two of its U.S. Patents (Nos. 5,555,190 and 6,505,131), which also relate to digital flowmeter
`
`technology. Emerson similarly denies that it infringes the asserted Invensys patents and asserts
`
`that these patents are invalid.
`
`Micro Motion has filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office petitions for Inter
`
`Partes Review (“IPR”) of each of the seven patents asserted by Invensys. The petitions allow the
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 5274
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 6 of 9 Page|D #: 5274
`
`U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board to evaluate the validity of the Invensys Patents on the basis
`
`of prior art. Four petitionshave been granted, and IPR proceedings have been instituted for U.S.
`
`Patents Nos. 7,124,646, 7,136,761, 6,311,136, and 7,505,854. A decision on the remaining three
`
`Invensys Patents will be made this summer. Micro Motion and Emerson have filed a motion
`
`with the District Court to stay the litigation pending the IPR proceedings.
`
`The Court conducted a claim construction hearing on May 1, 2014; no Markman Order
`
`has been entered. The parties are also in the midst of the discovery process, which is scheduled
`
`to close on July 16, 2014. A jury trial is scheduled for October 13, 2015.
`
`viii.
`
`Evidence to beobtained:
`
`Emerson and Micro Motion submit this Letter of Request for the purpose of obtaining
`
`documents from the University of Oxford, the employer of certain named inventors of the
`
`Invensys patents. Each of the document categories set forth below are directly relevant to the
`
`inventorship and chain-of-title of the Invensys Patents which are being asserted against Emerson
`
`and Micro Motion in this lawsuit.
`
`ix.
`
`Identity and address of entity to produce documents for examination or inspection:
`
`a.
`
`Entity from which documents are requested:
`
`. University of Oxford
`University Offices
`Wellington Square
`Oxford
`
`OX1 2JD
`
`United Kingdom
`Telephone: +44 1865 270000
`Fax: +44 1865 270708
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 5275
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 7 of 9 Page|D #: 5275
`
`x.
`
`Documents or other property to be produced for examination or inspection:
`
`a.
`
`University of Oxford:
`
`All written employment agreements and/or contracts between the listed inventors
`1)
`of the Invensys Patents (Manus Henry, David W. Clarke, Mayela E. Zamora, and Maria Jesus de
`la Fuente) and Oxford and any amendments and renewals thereof.
`
`All Written agreements, consents, and/or assignments between the listed inventors
`2)
`of the Invensys Patents (Manus Henry, David W. Clarke, Mayela B. Zamora, and Maria Jesus de
`la Fuente) and Oxford that address the issue of intellectual property as it relates to the Invensys
`Patents or patent applications relating to the Invensys Patents.
`
`3)
`amendments).
`
`4)
`amendments).
`
`5)
`amendments).
`
`Oxford’s Statute(s) and Regulation(s) relating to the 1980 IP Policy (including
`
`Oxford’s Statute(s) and Regulation(s) relating to the 1995 IP Policy (including
`
`Oxford’s Statute(s) and Regulation(s) relating to the 2000 IP Policy (including
`
`licenses, negotiations of any agreements or licenses, and/or
`All agreements,
`6)
`assignments between Oxford and Invensys that address the issue of intellectual property relating
`to the listed inventors (Manus Henry, David W. Clarke, Mayela E. Zamora, and Maria Jesus de
`la Fuente) of the Invensys Patents, work or research regarding the Invensys Patents, Coriolis
`flowmeters, or technology involving the same.
`
`Documents sufficient to describe the relationship between Oxford, UTC, and
`7)
`EPSRC as it relates to the Invensys Patents.
`
`Oxford’s practices in/for recording and maintaining records memorializing work
`8)
`or research relating to the Invensys Patents, Coriolis flowmeters, or technology involving the
`same.
`
`9)
`
`Valuation of or projected revenue from the Invensys Patents.
`
`All documents relating to any award, settlement, or recovery Oxford may recover
`10)
`from any infringement action relating to the Invensys Patents.
`
`Identification of
`11)
`aforementioned documents.
`
`an Oxford
`
`representative who
`
`can
`
`authenticate
`
`the
`
`All documents relating to any attempt by Oxford to commercialize Coriolis
`12)
`flowmeters for any bunkering application.
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 5276
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 8 of 9 Page|D #: 5276
`
`xi.
`
`Requirements that the evidence be given on oath or affirmation and any special
`form to be used:
`
`This Letter of Request includes the following requests:
`
`0 That a representative of Oxford be present to authenticate documents produced and/or
`otherwise made available for inspection and copying; and
`
`0 That the document production take place at: (1)-the offices of Eversheds LLP, One
`Wood Street London, EC2V 7WS, United Kingdom; or (2) a location as may be
`agreed upon between counsel for the parties;
`
`In the event the evidence cannot be taken in the manner or location requested, it is to be
`
`taken in such a manner or location as provided by local law.
`
`This Letter of Request also requests that the confidentiality of any evidence produced as a
`
`result of this Request be maintained pursuant to the laws of the United Kingdom as Well as
`
`pursuant
`
`to a Protective Order issued by this Court
`
`that provides specific confidentiality
`
`protections for certain documents and/or testimony furnished in the course of this litigation that
`
`include trade secrets, confidential business information, or other proprietary information.
`
`Pursuant to this Protective Order, this Court respectfully requests that this Letter of Request and
`
`any information provided in response to this Request not be disclosed to any individuals or
`
`entities other than the parties and their counsel or their or the Court’s designees. Emerson and
`
`Micro Motion agree to be bound by any similar protective order issued by the English Court
`
`pertaining to any information disclosed in response to this Request. Emerson and Micro Motion
`
`will not object to a request by Oxford for such an order.
`
`xii.
`
`Reciprocity:
`
`The Courts of the United States are authorized by statute codified at Title 28 of the
`
`United States Code, Section 1782 to extend similar assistance to the tribunals of the United
`
`

`
`Case 6:12-cv-00799-JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 5277
`Case 6:12—cv—OO799—JRG Document 174 Filed 06/30/14 Page 9 of 9 Page|D #: 5277
`
`Kingdom and will reciprocate the courtesies shown by the judicial authorities of the United
`
`Kingdom.
`
`xiii.
`
`Responsibility for reimbursable fees and costs:
`
`Fees and costs incurred which are reimbursable under the Hague Convention shall be
`
`borne by Foley & Lardner LLP, 777 East Milwaukee Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202,
`
`U.S.A.
`
` Dated:
`
`Hon. Leonard Davis
`
`-
`
`United States District Judge
`United States District Court for the
`Eastern District of Texas
`
`200 W. Ferguson, Third Floor
`Tyler, Texas 75702
`U.S.A.
`
`[Court’s seal]