Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :06-cv-00579-JJF Document 9 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 1 of 2
Asn-rev 8. GEDDES
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW TELEPHONE
222 ¤Er.AwARz»: AVENUE °°2`°°4`°°°°
P. 0. Box uso 3°;2;:L:;`:.,
wu.M|NGTON. DELAWARE 19899
December 15, 2006
Dr. Peter T. Dalleo VIA ELECTRONIC FILING
Clerk of the Court
United States District Court
844 King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Pulmonetic Systems, Inc. v. VersaMed Medical Systems, Inc.
Civil Action No. 06-564-JJF
Viasys Respiratory Care Inc. et al. v. VersaMed Medical Systems, Inc.
Civil Action No. 06-579-SLR
Dear Dr. Dalleoz
I am Delaware cormsel to the plaintiff in both of the above patent infringement actions,
and I am writing, consistent with the spirit of Local Rule 3.l(b), to alert the Court to the fact that
substantial overlap exists between these two cases. No request for consolidation is being made
in this letter, and in fact, no request is being made for anything at all. I am writing merely as a
courtesy, on the chance that the Court might appreciate being made aware of the overlap between
these cases in order to consider the desirability, for reasons of efficiency, of assigning both cases
to the same Judge.
Civil Action No. 06-564-JJF (the "Pu1monetic lawsuit”) was filed on September 12,
2006. We held off serving the complaint in order to facilitate settlement discussions between the
parties, which unfortrmately were not successiiil. The complaint was served earlier today.
Civil Action No. 06-579-SLR (the "Viasys lawsuit") was filed on September 15, 2006.
Following prompt service of the complaint, defendant served its answer and counterclaims on
September 26, 2006, and plaintiff served its reply to the counterclaims on October 16, 2006.
There have been no other substantive filings in the Viasys lawsuit.
The overlap arises from the following facts:
l. All of the plaintiffs are subsidiaries of Viasys Healthcare Inc.

Case 1 :06-cv-00579-JJF Document 9 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 2 of 2
Dr. Peter T. Dalleo
December 15, 2006
Page 2
2. The patentee in the Pulmonetic lawsuit is Douglas F. DeVries. Mr. DeVries is
also the first named inventor on the patent asserted in the Viasys lawsuit.
3. The asserted patents relate to ventilators.
4. All of the plaintiffs are represented by Sidley Austin LLP and Ashby & Geddes.
5. The defendant in both lawsuits is the same.
6. The defendant is represented by the same lawyers in both matters. Although
defense counsel have not yet appeared in the Pulmonetic lawsuit, the attorneys
who represented the defendant in the settlement discussions in that case are the
same attomeys who have appeared for the defendant in the Viasys lawsuit.
Plaintiffs will be equally pleased to have both cases assigned to the same Judge, or to remain
assigned to different Judges, and we seek only to make the Court aware of the issue so that it can
make an infonned decision as to how it wishes to proceed.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Steven J Balick
Steven J. Balick
SJB/dmf
c: The Honorable Sue L. Robinson (by hand)
The Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr. (by hand)
Jack B. Blumenfeld, Esquire (by hand and via electronic mail)
Steven P. Weihrouch, Esquire (via electronic mail)
Jeffrey M. Olson, Esquire (via electronic mail)