Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 1 of 6
`
`CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`BY: ________________________________
`
`FILED
`
`DEPUTY
`
`March 11, 2022
`
`lad
`
`
`
`CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`BY: ________________________________
`
`FILED
`
`DEPUTY
`
`March 11, 2022
`
`lad
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 2 of 6
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 2 of 6
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Vv.
`
`Renesas Electronics Corporation and Renesas
`Electronics America,Inc.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC,
`
`Plaintiff
`
`v.
`
`Silicon Laboratories Inc.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC,
`
`Plaintiff
`
`v.
`
`STMicroelectronics,Inc.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Action No.: 6:20-cv-1213-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`Civil Action No.: 6:20-cv-1214-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`Civil Action No.: 6:20-cv-1215-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 3 of 6
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 3 of 6
`
`Plaintiff
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC,
`
`
`
`Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
`
`
`
`Civil Action No.: 6:20-cv-1216-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`Defendant.
`
`TO THE APPROPRIATE CENTRAL AUTHORITYOF JAPAN:
`
`The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas presents its
`
`compliments to the appropriate Central Authority of Japan, and requestsjudicial assistance to
`
`obtain evidence to be used in a civil proceeding before this Court in the above-captioned matters.
`
`The Court requests the assistance described herein as necessary in the interests ofjustice.
`
`I. REQUEST
`
`The Court requests that the appropriate Central Authority ofJapan compe! production of
`
`documents andtestimony ofa representative or representatives from the following corporate
`
`entity:
`
`Kioxia Corporation
`3-1-21, Shibaura, Minato-ku
`Tokyo 108-0023
`Japan
`
`Kioxia Corporation is represented by:
`
`Doug Stewart
`BRACEWELL LLP
`701 Fifth Avenue Suite 6200
`Seattle, WA 98104
`Telephone: (206) 204-6721
`Doug.Stewart@bracewell.com
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 4 of 6
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 4 of 6
`
`Specifically, the Court requests that Kioxia Corporation (“Kioxia”) produce the
`
`documents and things set forth in AttachmentA to this Request and thereafter produce a witness
`
`or witnessesto testify regarding the deposition topics set forth in Attachment A. The Court
`
`requests that the witness be placed underoath, subject to questioning by counselfor the parties to
`
`the above-captioned matters, and that a verbatim transcript of the testimony be taken.
`
`The Court understands that the documents and information requested may be of a
`
`confidential nature. As such,there is a Protective Orderin this case to protect the confidentiality
`
`of any documents produced. A copyofthe Protective Order is appended to Attachment A.
`
`If service cannotbe effected at the address indicated above, this Court respectfully
`
`requests judicial assistance to effect service by any means permitted under Japaneselaw.
`
`This Court further requests that the executed Letters Rogatory and any evidence produced
`
`in response be sent directly to counsel for the Requesting Party, Ocean Semiconductor LLC
`
`(“Ocean Semiconductor”), at the following address:
`
`Alex Chan
`Devlin Law Firm LLC
`1526 Gilpin Avenue
`Wilmington, DE 19806
`achan@devlinlawfirm.com
`
`I. FACTS
`
`Plaintiff Ocean Semiconductorhas filed lawsuits against Defendants Mediatek Inc. and
`Mediatek USA Inc. (““Mediatek”), NVIDIA Corporation (“NVIDIA”), NXP USA, Inc. (“NXP”),
`Renesas Electronics Corporation and Renesas Electronics America,Inc. (“Renesas”), Silicon
`
`Laboratories Inc. (“Silicon Labs”), STMicroelectronics, Inc. (“STMicro”), and Western Digital
`
`Technologies,Inc. (“WD”) (collectively “Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the
`
`Western District of Texas as reflected in the caption above. Ocean seeks a judgmentthat
`
`Defendants infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 6,660,651, 6,907,305, 6,725,402, 6,968,248, 7,080,330,
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 5of6
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 5 of 6
`
`6,836,691, and 8,676,538 (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).! Ocean Semiconductor seeks an
`
`award of damages from Defendants to compensate for the alleged patent infringement. The
`
`technology described and claimed in the Asserted Patents relates to, among other things, the use
`
`of a movable waferstage, fault detection, process scheduling, and measurementofcritical
`
`dimension and overlay in semiconductor manufacturing.
`
`In response to Ocean Semiconductor’s infringement claims, Defendants have asserted
`
`defensesthat include noninfringement, patent exhaustion,license, and implied license. The
`documents requested in AttachmentA are critical to Ocean Semiconductor’s ability to
`demonstrate Defendants’ infringementofthe Asserted Patents and to properly and fully respond
`
`to Defendants’ defenses.
`|
`III. OFFER OF RECIPROCAL ASSISTANCE
`
`The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas is willing to provide
`
`similar assistance to the appropriate Central Authority of Japan. See 28 U.S.C.§ 1782.
`
`IV. REIMBURSEMENTFOR COSTS
`
`This Court, through Plaintiff Ocean Semiconductor, is willing to reimburse the
`
`appropriate Central Authority of Japan for costs and expenses incurred in executing these Letters
`
`Rogatory.
`
`
`' Ocean also seeks a judgment against NXP and STMicro for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`6,420,097. However, Oceanis not presently seeking information from Kioxia related to those
`claims.
`
`iii
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01215-ADA Document 63 Filed 03/11/22 Page 6 of 6
`
`A true copy of the original, I certify.
`Clerk, U.S. District Court
`By___________________________
`Deputy
`
`Leigh Diaz
`
`March 11, 2022
`
`
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
