Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 1 of 24
`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 1 of 24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT H
`EXHIBIT H
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 2 of 24
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`MEDIATEK INC., AND MEDIATEK
`USA INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-1210-ADA
`
`
`
`
`NON-PARTY KIOXIA AMERICA, INC.’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`PLAINTIFF OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC’S DOCUMENT SUBPOENA
`Pursuant to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Kioxia America, Inc. (“KAI”)
`hereby serves its responses and objections to Ocean Semiconductor LLP’s (“Ocean”) Subpoena to
`Testify at a Deposition in a Civil Action, as amended by Ocean’s counsel and provided to the
`undersigned counsel on January 26, 2022 (the “Subpoena”).
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`1.
`KAI objects to the definitions of “Kioxia,” “You,” and “Your” to the extent such
`definitions encompass entities other than KAI over which KAI exercises no control. KAI objects
`to Ocean’s use of these overly broad definitions to the extent Ocean has done so in order to seek
`information and/or documents outside the possession, custody, and control of KAI by conflating
`KAI, a distinct, standalone legal entity, with separate, legally distinct parents, subsidiaries,
`affiliates, predecessors, successors, assigns, and partners. KAI is responding to these requests only
`on behalf of itself and only to the extent it has possession, custody, or control over the subpoenaed
`information, and its response to each demand for information should be understood to necessarily
`exclude information over which KAI has no possession, custody, or control, notwithstanding
`Ocean’s overly broad definitions of the terms “Kioxia,” “You,” and “Your.”
`2.
`KAI objects to the definition of “Plaintiff” (and the corresponding terms) on the
`grounds that KAI is unaware of any past or present individuals or entities in any way associated
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 3 of 24
`
`with Ocean and therefore cannot respond based on Ocean’s supplied definition. To the extent
`there are specific individuals or entities that Ocean would like KAI to consider, KAI requests that
`Ocean identify them with specificity.
`3.
`KAI objects to the definitions of “ASML,” “Applied Materials,” “PDF Solutions,”
`and “Defendant” / “Defendants” to the extent Ocean’s definitions seek to include any past or
`present individuals or entities in any way associated with each of the defined entities with which
`KAI is not familiar.
`4.
`KAI objects to the definition of “Western Digital Infringing Instrumentalities” (and
`by extension, “Infringing Instrumentalities” and “Product” / “Products”) on the basis that the terms
`“automotive products,” “connected home products,” “industrial and IoT products,” “mobile
`products,” “surveillance products,” and “flash memory” are ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly
`burdensome in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(1) to the extent they are neither defined nor
`limited to any specific entity’s products or any specifically identified products. Indeed, as drafted,
`the definitions are not limited to products of Western Digital Technologies, Inc. (“Western
`Digital”) or those of any of the parties to the Actions, but instead would apply to all information
`related to all such products (an equally ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome
`description) and any “similar systems, products, devices, and integrated circuits” (an equally
`ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome description) of any company. KAI therefore
`interprets the defined terms as referring to the Western Digital products cited as examples in the
`Subpoena, assuming that the various “e.g.” references are in fact to a Western Digital product and
`can be identified as such based on the names provided in the definitions.
`5.
`KAI objects to the definition of “Huawei Infringement Instrumentalities” (and by
`extension “Infringing Instrumentalities” and “Product” / “Products”) on the basis that the terms
`“SoC chipsets and solutions,” “processors,” “TV solutions,” “Kirtin solutions,” “Ascend
`solutions,” “Balong solutions” are ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome in violation of
`Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(1) to the extent they are neither defined nor limited to any specific entity’s
`products or any specifically identified products. Indeed, as drafted, the definitions are not limited
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 4 of 24
`
`to products of Huawei Device USA, Inc., Huawei Device Co., Ltd., or HiSilicon Technologies
`Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Huawei”) or those of any of the parties to the Actions, but instead would
`apply to information related to all such products (an equally ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly
`burdensome description) and any “similar systems, products, devices, and integrated circuits” (an
`equally ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome description) of any company. KAI
`therefore interprets the defined terms as referring to the Huawei products cited as examples in the
`Subpoena, assuming that the various “e.g.” references are in fact to a Huawei product and can be
`identified as such based on the names provided in the definitions.
`6.
`KAI objects to the definitions of “YieldStar,” “TWINSCAN,” “E3,” “Smart
`Factory,” and “Extensio” (and by extension “Manufacturing Equipment”) to the extent such
`definitions seek to encompass systems, products, and/or models other than those actually identified
`by Ocean. Specifically, the use of “any and all . . . systems designed, developed, assembled, and/or
`manufactured” is ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P.
`45(d)(1).
`7.
`KAI objects to the definition of “Equipment Manufacturers” to the extent it is not
`limited to the identified companies—ASML, Applied Materials, and PDF Solutions. KAI further
`incorporates General Objection No. 3 by reference.
`8.
`KAI objects to the definitions of “Identify,” “identify,” “Describe,” and “Date” to
`the extent such definitions require KAI to “state” information other than information contained in
`any documents which may be produced or as specifically requested in connection with any of the
`specific deposition topics in the Subpoena.
`9.
`KAI objects to the fact that Ocean has failed to limit its requests to any specific
`time period (with the exception of Request No. 10), thus rendering the Subpoena overbroad and
`unduly burdensome in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(1).
`10.
`KAI objects to the location of compliance on the ground that it violates Fed. R. Civ.
`P. 45(d)(1). Although KAI maintains a place of business in Austin, Texas, Ocean withdrew and
`re-served a subpoena on KAI with a location of compliance in San Francisco, California based on
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 5 of 24
`
`facts disclosed by KAI in connection with a motion to quash the original subpoena. That motion
`placed Ocean on notice that any relevant documents and witnesses would be located in California.
`Nonetheless, Ocean subsequently amended the Subpoena and changed the location of compliance
`to Austin, Texas (but failed to properly re-serve the Subpoena or ask undersigned counsel to accept
`service of the Subpoena) despite knowing that doing so would increase the burden to KAI.
`11.
`KAI objects to the subpoena in this case because, under the definitions of Actions,
`Defendants, and Infringing Instrumentalities, none of the information is relevant to the underlying
`action for which the subpoena issued, and therefore improperly burdens a non-party in violation
`of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.
`12.
` To the extent that KAI responds to any demands covered by these General
`Objections, KAI’s response is without waiver and without prejudice concerning these objections,
`and expressly incorporates by reference each relevant objection to any definition where that
`defined term is used in a request.
`SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO DOCUMENT REQUESTS
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1
`Documents sufficient to show the use, utilization, installation, implementation, and/or
`deployment of any Manufacturing Equipment in any of Your manufacturing and/or fabrication
`facility in connection with Your manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all
`Infringing Instrumentalities for any Defendant, including the identification of all versions and
`models of any such system and the location of such use, utilization, installation, implementation,
`and/or deployment including the location of any and all such fabrication facilities.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because, although it seeks
`documents “sufficient to show,” it repeatedly uses the terms “any” and “all” in connection with
`multiple sub-requests and therefore improperly seeks all such documents. KAI also objects to the
`term “such system,” which lacks antecedent basis in the request; no “system” is defined in
`connection with the request.
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 6 of 24
`
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have manufacturing and/or fabrication facilities and does not manufacture, fabricate, and/or
`assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities, nor does KAI use, utilize, install, implement, or
`deploy any versions or models of any “system,” and therefore has no documents responsive to this
`request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2
`Purchase or sales orders, invoices, purchase agreements, sales agreements, and/or supplier
`agreements relating to any Manufacturing Equipment.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request for failing to limit the burden on a non-party as required by Fed.
`
`R. Civ. P. 45. These documents should be requested from a party or the Equipment Manufacturers.
`KAI further objects to this request as beyond the scope of discovery on a non-party under Fed. R.
`Civ. P. 45 because the topic has no legitimate bearing on issues relevant to the Actions. KAI also
`objects because it has no Manufacturing Equipment.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it has no
`documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3
`Documents relating to the design, development, operation, and/or implementation of any
`APC and/or FDC hardware, software, systems, components, and/or modules by any entity other
`than Applied Materials or PDF Solutions that are/were used, utilized, installed, implemented
`and/or deployed in Your manufacturing, fabrication, and/or assembly tool, equipment, and/or
`facility in connection with Your manufacturing, fabrication, and/or assembly of any Infringing
`Instrumentalities, including any in-house and/or proprietary APC and/or FDC hardware, software,
`systems, components, and/or modules designed, developed, operated, and/or implemented by You.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome in violation
`
`of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(1) on that ground that it seeks an unlimited scope of APC- and FDC-
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 7 of 24
`
`related documents from every entity except for Applied Materials and PDF Solutions (as KAI
`interprets those definitions in accordance with its General Objections). KAI further objects to this
`request as beyond the scope of discovery of a non-party under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 because the topic
`has no legitimate bearing on issues relevant to the Actions. KAI further objects to the phrase
`“and/or assembly tool, equipment and/or facility” on the ground that, as used in the request, the
`meaning is ambiguous. KAI interprets the request as seeking documents in connection with
`alleged KAI manufacturing or fabrication facilities (including tools or equipment located therein
`and used in connection with the manufacturing, fabrication, and/or assembly of the Infringing
`Instrumentalities (as KAI interprets that definition in accordance with its General Objection).
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have manufacturing and/or fabrication facilities; does not manufacture, fabricate, and/or
`assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities; and does not use, utilize, install, implement, or
`deploy any APC and/or FDC hardware, systems, components, and/or modules created by any
`entity whatsoever, whether in-house or not, and therefore has no documents responsive to this
`request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4
`Documents sufficient to show the identity and role played by any and all Defendants in the
`design, development, manufacture, testing, and/or importation of the Infringing Instrumentalities
`that are/were fabricated, manufactured, and/or assembled by You using any Manufacturing
`Equipment.
`RESPONSE:
`Subject to the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not fabricate,
`manufacture, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using any Manufacturing
`Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI design, develop, manufacture, test, or import the Infringing
`Instrumentalities, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession,
`custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 8 of 24
`
`Documents sufficient to identify any and all systems, devices, components, or integrated
`circuits manufactured, fabricated, and/or assembled on behalf of any and all Defendants using any
`Manufacturing Equipment, including the identification of any and all applicable technology
`node(s) for which each such system is/was used.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request on the ground that the phrase “applicable technology node(s)”
`
`is undefined and ambiguous. KAI further objects to this request as vague, overbroad, and unduly
`burdensome to the extent it seeks “any and all systems, devices, components, or integrated circuits”
`made or assembled on behalf of the Defendants regardless of whether that manufacturing,
`fabrication, or assembly involves the Infringing Instrumentalities, thus potentially sweeping in
`completely unrelated products. Moreover, this request impermissibly places the burden of
`identifying infringing products on a non-party, rather than the party alleging infringement of a
`patent claim.
`
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, and although the request
`fails to specifically refer to the cited actions as being taken by KAI, KAI states that it does not
`manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using any
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, and that it has no documents responsive to this request in
`its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6
`Documents relating to Your agreement or contract with any and all Defendants to fabricate,
`manufacture, and/or assemble those systems, devices, components, and/or integrated circuits
`described in Request for Production No. 17, including, without limitation, master service
`agreements, partnership agreements, development agreements, contract manufacturing
`agreements, manufacturing supply agreements, supplier agreements, distribution agreements,
`manufacturing contract service level agreements, and semiconductor purchase agreements.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request on the basis that it does not understand how Request for
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 9 of 24
`
`Production No. 17 relates to this request. KAI further objects to this request to the extent Ocean’s
`use of the inclusive phrasing “including, without limitation, . . . and” seeks exemplars of each type
`of document identified without regard to whether such documents exist.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not fabricate, manufacture, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities, nor does KAI have
`any agreement or contract with any Defendant to fabricate, manufacture, or assemble any system,
`device, component, or integrated circuits, and therefore has no documents responsive to this
`request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7
`Documents relating to any agreement between You and any Equipment Manufacturer or
`any of the Defendants to be indemnified by, or to indemnify, any Equipment Manufacturer or any
`of the Defendants for patent infringement in connection with Your use, utilization, installation,
`implementation, and/or deployment of any Manufacturing Equipment.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request for failing to limit the burden on a non-party as required by Fed.
`R. Civ. P. 45. These documents should be requested from a party or the Equipment Manufacturers.
`Subject to this objection and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not
`use, install, implement, or deploy any Manufacturing Equipment and therefore has no documents
`responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8
`Documents sufficient to show the set-up, configuration, maintenance, and operation of the
`Manufacturing Equipment including describing how You set up, configure, maintain, and/or
`operate the Manufacturing Equipment involved in the manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly
`of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`Subject to the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not manufacture,
`fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using Manufacturing Equipment or
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 10 of 24
`
`otherwise, nor does KAI set up, configure, maintain, and/or operate any Manufacturing
`Equipment, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody,
`or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9
`Documents sufficient to show technical, hardware, or software support requested by You
`and sent to any of the Equipment Manufacturers in connection with Your use, utilization,
`installation, implementation, and/or deployment of any and all Manufacturing Equipment.
`RESPONSE:
`Subject to the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not manufacture,
`fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the Manufacturing Equipment
`or otherwise, nor does KAI use, install, implement, or deploy any Manufacturing Equipment, and
`therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10
`Documents sufficient to show the sales volume, revenues, costs of goods sold, gross profits,
`operating costs, operating profits, and/or net profits directly or indirectly related to the
`manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of systems, devices, components, or integrated circuits,
`including the Infringing Instrumentalities, that are/were manufactured, fabricated, and/or assembly
`on behalf of any and all Defendants in connection with Your use, utilization, installation,
`implementation, and/or deployment of the Manufacturing Equipment from 2014 to the present.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request on the ground that it is overbroad and unduly burdensome to
`the extent it seeks documents related to any Defendant product rather than just the Infringing
`Instrumentalities. KAI objects to this request to the extent “and/or assembly” should read “and/or
`assembled.”
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI use, install, implement, or deploy any
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 11 of 24
`
`Manufacturing Equipment, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its
`possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11
`Documents sufficient to show any manufacturing equipment, tool, and/or platform used,
`utilized, installed, implemented, and/or deployed in any of Your manufacturing and/or fabrication
`facilities that includes an adjustable wafer stage.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request on the ground that it is not limited in any way, e.g., by product
`made or used to make, and therefore bears no direct relation to the Actions, which imposes an
`undue burden on a non-party in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.
`Subject to this objection and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not
`have manufacturing or fabrication facilities and does not manufacture or fabricate products, nor
`use, install, implement, or deploy any manufacturing equipment, tool, or platform and therefore
`has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12
`Documents relating to identifying, detecting and/or determining whether a manufacturing-
`related fault exists in Your manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or equipment used for Your
`manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities, any
`subsequent remedial actions taken in response to a manufacturing related fault, as well as
`manufacturing-related actions taken by You in response to such manufacturing and/or fabrication
`tool and/or equipment being malfunctioned, inoperable, and/or defective during such manufacture,
`fabrication, and/or assembly.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as vague and ambiguous because the phrases “subsequent
`
`remedial actions” and “manufacturing-related actions” are undefined and unclear on their own or
`in comparison to one another. KAI further objects to this request as vague and ambiguous because
`the phrase “being malfunctioned” is undefined and unclear.
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 12 of 24
`
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI have, own, or operate any manufacturing
`or fabrication tools or equipment, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its
`possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13
`Documents relating to the translation of communications or data connection protocols (e.g.,
`SECS (SEMI equipment communication standard), TCP/IP, OPC (OLE for Process Control),
`TIBCO, and ODP (optical data profiling)) between Your manufacturing and/or fabrication tool
`and/or equipment and Your FDC system, platform, and/or framework.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as vague and ambiguous because the phrase “translation of
`communications or data connection protocols” is undefined and unclear. KAI further incorporates
`its objections to Request No. 3 as if fully stated herein.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have any manufacturing or fabrication tools or equipment, nor does KAI have a FDC system,
`platform, or framework, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its
`possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14
`Documents sufficient to show the scheduling of factory events, preventive maintenance
`(“PMs”), manufacturing tasks and/or qualification tests (“Quals”) in connection with Your
`manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or equipment used for Your manufacture, fabrication,
`and/or assembly of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities, including, without limitation,
`scheduling of processing for lots and/or wafers, manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or
`equipment, PMs and Quals, and/or manufacturing resources in connection with Your manufacture,
`fabrication and/or assembly of the Infringing Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 13 of 24
`
`KAI objects to this request as vague and ambiguous because the phrase “factory events” is
`undefined, unclear, and overbroad and the phrase “manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or
`equipment used” is unclear.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have any manufacturing or fabrication tools or equipment, does not manufacture, fabricate, or
`assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise,
`and does not schedule factory events, PMs, manufacturing tasks, or Quals, and therefore has no
`documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15
`Documents sufficient to show Your manufacturing execution system (“MES”) used,
`utilized, installed, implemented, and/or deployed at any of Your manufacturing and/or fabrication
`facilities in connection with Your manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or equipment used for
`Your manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because it requests
`documents for “any and all” Infringing Instrumentalities for an unlimited time period.
`Subject to this objection and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not
`have manufacturing or fabrication facilities and does not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any
`of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI
`utilize, install, implement, or deploy any MES in any facility, and therefore has no documents
`responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16
`Documents sufficient to show Your measurement of critical dimension (“CD”) and/or
`overlay in connection with any and all semiconductor wafers used for Your manufacture,
`fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because it requests
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 14 of 24
`
`documents for “any and all” semiconductor wafers for Infringing Instrumentalities for an unlimited
`time period.
`Subject to this objection and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not
`manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI measure CD or overlay in any manner, and
`therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17
`Documents relating to Your collection of metrology data used in connection with Your
`manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all Infringing Instrumentalities, including
`monitoring semiconductor wafers, modifying operating recipes, processing such metrology data
`such as, without limitation, data filtering, and/or controlling Your manufacturing and/or
`fabrication tool and/or equipment used for Your manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any
`and all Infringing Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because it requests
`metrology data for “any and all” Infringing Instrumentalities for an unlimited time period.
`Subject to this objection and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does not
`manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor does KAI collect metrology data of any type, and
`therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18
`Documents sufficient to show how You determine whether a manufacturing-related fault
`identified, detected, and/or determined to exist in Your manufacturing and/or fabrication tool
`and/or equipment used for Your manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all
`Infringing Instrumentalities is a false positive or false negative, a fault that requires You to
`remediate, rectify, cure, or correct such a fault.
`RESPONSE:
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 15 of 24
`
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because, although using
`the phrase “sufficient to show,” it nevertheless requests information regarding each and every fault
`in any manufacturing or fabrication tool or manufacturing or fabrication equipment used in
`connection with “any and all” Infringing Instrumentalities for an unlimited time period. KAI
`further objects because the phrase “false positive or false negative, a fault that requires . . . such a
`fault” is vague and ambiguous.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have manufacturing or fabrication facilities and does not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble
`any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, nor is
`KAI involved in the identification, detection, determination, remediation, rectification, cure, or
`correction of any type of manufacturing-related fault, and therefore has no documents responsive
`to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19
`Documents sufficient to show any adjustment or modification to any fault detection
`analysis as described in Request for Production No. 40, including any adjustment or modification
`of any parameters that contribute to the identification, detection, and/or determination as to
`whether a manufacturing-related fault exists in Your manufacturing and/or fabrication tool and/or
`equipment used for Your manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any and all Infringing
`Instrumentalities.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request because Request for Production No. 40 was removed from the
`amended subpoena and therefore the internal cross-reference is non-existent. KAI further objects
`to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because, although using the phrase “sufficient
`to show,” it nevertheless requests information regarding “any” fault detection analysis for an
`unlimited time period.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not have manufacturing or fabrication facilities and does not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-01213-ADA Document 70-9 Filed 03/04/22 Page 16 of 24
`
`any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, and
`therefore makes no adjustments or modifications to any type of fault detection analysis, and
`therefore has no documents responsive to this request in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20
`Documents relating to the importation into the United States and/or offer for sale, sale, or
`use within the United States of any and all systems, devices, components, and/or integrated circuits
`that are/were manufactured, fabricated, or assembled by You on behalf of any and all Defendants
`in connection with the use, utilization, installation, implementation, and/or deployment of the
`Manufacturing Equipment.
`RESPONSE:
`KAI objects to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because any of the
`
`requested records, which relate solely to Defendants’ products, should be requested from
`Defendants, rather than a non-party in order to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. KAI also objects
`to this request as overbroad and unduly burdensome because it seeks documents for “any and all”
`of Defendants’ products for an unlimited time period.
`Subject to these objections and the foregoing General Objections, KAI states that it does
`not manufacture, fabricate, or assemble any of the Infringing Instrumentalities using the
`Manufacturing Equipment or otherwise, and therefore has no documents responsive to this request
`in its possession, custody, or control.
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21
`Documents relating to the importation into the United States and/or offer for sale, sale, or
`use within the United States of any and all systems, devices, components, and/or integrated circuits
`that are/were manufacture