`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 1 of 6 Page|D# 12471
`
`EXHIBIT 31
`
`EXHIBIT 31
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 2 of 6 PageID# 12472
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`Alexandria Division
`
`
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC. and
`R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:20cv00393-LO-TCB
`
`
`
`v.
`
`ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; PHILIP
`MORRIS USA, INC.; and PHILIP MORRIS
`PRODUCTS S.A.,
`
`Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC. AND R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY’S
`OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC, PHILIP
`MORRIS USA, INC., AND PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS S.A.’S FIFTH SET OF
`REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION (NOS. 264-287)
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 36 and Local Rule 26(C), RAI
`
`Strategic Holdings, Inc. and R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, “Reynolds”) hereby
`
`respond to Altria Client Services LLC, Philip Morris USA, Inc., and Philip Morris Products S.A.’s
`
`(collectively, “Defendants” or “Counterclaim Plaintiffs”) Fifth Set of Requests for Admission
`
`(Nos. 264-287) as follows.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`Reynolds has not yet completed discovery relating to this case, and while it has made
`
`reasonable investigation for responsive information, its investigation of the facts is continuing.
`
`Reynolds objects and will respond to these Requests for Admission as it interprets and understands
`
`each request as set forth. Reynolds’s objections and responses to these requests are made without
`
`prejudice to Reynolds’s right to supplement, correct, or otherwise modify the objections and
`
`responses to the extent permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules for
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 3 of 6 PageID# 12473
`
`OBJECTIONS:
`
`Reynolds objects to this Request as an improper substitute for discovery devices such as
`
`interrogatories or requests for production. See Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co. v. Johnson, 272 F.R.D.
`
`177, 183 (S.D. W. Va. 2010) (noting that Rule 36(a) requests “are not a discovery device” (quoting
`
`Harris v. Koenig, 271 F.R.D. 356, 372 (D.D.C. 2010))). Reynolds objects to this Request as
`
`seeking disputed legal and factual contentions.
`
`RESPONSE:
`
`Subject to and without waiving its Objections, Reynolds states that it lacks sufficient
`
`information about the MarkTen Product to determine whether it practices claim 1 of the ’545
`
`Patent under the Court’s claim constructions, and therefore admits.
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 270:
`
`
`
`Admit that Nu Mark LLC’s MarkTen Elite Product practices one or more claims of the
`
`’545 Patent under the Court’s claim constructions.
`
`OBJECTIONS:
`
`Reynolds objects to this Request as an improper substitute for discovery devices such as
`
`interrogatories or requests for production. See Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co. v. Johnson, 272 F.R.D.
`
`177, 183 (S.D. W. Va. 2010) (noting that Rule 36(a) requests “are not a discovery device” (quoting
`
`Harris v. Koenig, 271 F.R.D. 356, 372 (D.D.C. 2010))). Reynolds objects to this Request as
`
`seeking disputed legal and factual contentions. Reynolds objects to this Request to the extent it
`
`seeks information from entities other than Reynolds.
`
`RESPONSE:
`
`Subject to and without waiving its Objections, Reynolds admits that Nu Mark LLC’s
`
`MarkTen Elite Product practices one or more claims of the ’545 Patent as those claims are
`
`construed and asserted by Defendants. See March 24, 2021, Expert Report of Travis Blalock
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 4 of 6 PageID# 12474
`
`¶¶ 159-67. Reynolds denies that Nu Mark LLC’s MarkTen Elite Product practices one or more
`
`claims of the ’545 Patent as Reynolds applies the claims. See March 24, 2021, Expert Report of
`
`Travis Blalock ¶¶ 159-67; see also Reynolds’s Supplemental Response to Interrogatory No. 28
`
`(Mar. 29, 2021).
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 271:
`
`
`
`Admit that Nu Mark LLC’s MarkTen Elite Product does not practice one or more claims
`
`of the ’545 Patent under the Court’s claim constructions.
`
`OBJECTIONS:
`
`Reynolds objects to this Request as an improper substitute for discovery devices such as
`
`interrogatories or requests for production. See Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co. v. Johnson, 272 F.R.D.
`
`177, 183 (S.D. W. Va. 2010) (noting that Rule 36(a) requests “are not a discovery device” (quoting
`
`Harris v. Koenig, 271 F.R.D. 356, 372 (D.D.C. 2010))). Reynolds objects to this Request as
`
`seeking disputed legal and factual contentions. Reynolds objects to this Request to the extent it
`
`seeks information from entities other than Reynolds.
`
`RESPONSE:
`
`Subject to and without waiving its Objections, Reynolds admits that Nu Mark LLC’s
`
`MarkTen Elite Product does not practice one or more claims of the ’545 Patent as Reynolds applies
`
`the claims. See March 24, 2021, Expert Report of Travis Blalock ¶¶ 159-67; see also Reynolds’s
`
`Supplemental Response to Interrogatory No. 28 (Mar. 29, 2021). Reynolds denies that Nu Mark
`
`LLC’s MarkTen Elite Product does not practice one or more claims of the ’545 Patent as those
`
`claims are construed and asserted by Defendants. See March 24, 2021, Expert Report of Travis
`
`Blalock ¶¶ 159-67.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 5 of 6 PageID# 12475
`
`Dated: April 2, 2021
`
`Stephanie E. Parker
`JONES DAY
`1420 Peachtree Street, N.E.
`Suite 800
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Telephone: (404) 521-3939
`Facsimile: (404) 581-8330
`Email: separker@jonesday.com
`
`Anthony M. Insogna
`JONES DAY
`4655 Executive Drive
`Suite 1500
`San Diego, CA 92121
`Telephone: (858) 314-1200
`Facsimile: (844) 345-3178
`Email: aminsogna@jonesday.com
`
`William E. Devitt
`JONES DAY
`77 West Wacker
`Suite 3500
`Chicago, IL 60601
`Telephone: (312) 269-4240
`Facsimile: (312) 782-8585
`Email: wdevitt@jonesday.com
`
`Sanjiv P. Laud
`JONES DAY
`90 South Seventh Street
`Suite 4950
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Telephone: (612) 217-8800
`Facsimile: (844) 345-3178
`Email: slaud@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ David M. Maiorana
`David M. Maiorana (VA Bar No. 42334)
`Ryan B. McCrum
`JONES DAY
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`Telephone: (216) 586-3939
`Facsimile: (216) 579-0212
`Email: dmaiorana@jonesday.com
`Email: rbmccrum@jonesday.com
`
`John J. Normile
`JONES DAY
`250 Vesey Street
`New York, NY 10281
`Tel: (212) 326-3939
`Fax: (212) 755-7306
`Email: jjnormile@jonesday.com
`
`Alexis A. Smith
`JONES DAY
`555 South Flower Street
`Fiftieth Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Telephone: (213) 243-2653
`Facsimile: (213) 243-2539
`Email: asmith@jonesday.com
`
`Charles B. Molster, III (VA Bar No. 23613)
`The Law Offices of Charles B. Molster III PLLC
`2141 Wisconsin Ave., N.W., Suite M
`Washington, DC 20007
`Telephone: 703-346-1505
`Email: cmolster@molsterlaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiffs RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc.
`and R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 560-4 Filed 04/15/21 Page 6 of 6 PageID# 12476
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that on April 2, 2021, the foregoing was served on counsel for
`
`Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs using
`
`the
`
`following designated
`
`
`address:
`
`pmiedva.lwteam@lw.com.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: April 2, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ David M Maiorana
`David M. Maiorana (VA Bar No. 42334)
`JONES DAY
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`Telephone: (216) 586-3939
`Facsimile: (216) 579-0212
`Email: dmaiorana@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`