Free Notice (Other) - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:05-cv—O0292-JJF Document 167-2 Filed 04/05/2006 Page 1 of 1 A
King, Matthew W. T
From: King, Matthew W. (
Sent: Wednesday, Aprii 05, 2006 3:19 PM T
To: '[email protected]'
Cc: 'gbono@mckenna|ong.com'; ‘[email protected]‘; ‘rkirl<@bayardfirm.com';
Whetzel, Robert W.; Christine Dudzik; Glenn Rhodes; Helen Dutton; James Li; Judy ;
MacGregor; Julie Gabler; Salmaan Ouader; Steve Yovits; Terry Corbin J
Your Honor: ‘ i
lwrite on behalf of Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd., Tatung Company, Tatung Company of America, ,
inc., and Viewsonic Corporation (collectively "CPT"). Pursuant to Paragraph 4(c) of the Joint Rule 16 Scheduling Order ,
(D.i. 62) and Section 2(b)(iii) ofthe Protective Order (D.I. 76), CPT has the duty to inform the Court via email that the
parties' dispute, on the issue of whether Mr. Scott Holmberg should be allowed to access CPT's confidential information, is r
ready for decision. T
On February 23, 2006, CPT received a letter from Plaintiff LG Philips LCD Co., Ltd. ("LPL") that identified ll/Ir.
Holmberg as a consulting expert for LPL. On March 3, CPT officially objected to Mr. Hoimberg's access to CPT's
confidential information. On March 10, pursuant to Section 2(b)(iii) of the Protective Order, CPT filed its Motion for Order
Barring Disclosure of CPT's Confidential and Confidential Attorney Only information to Mr. Scott Hoimberg ("the Motion"),
LPL's retained consultant and the named inventor of one of the patents—in-suit. On March 17, LPL filed its opposition to the
motion. (
The Protective Order requires the moving party to inform this Court that the issue is ready for decision.
Accordingly, CPT respectfully requests that this Court render its decision on CPT's motion to bar Mr. Holmberg's access to .
CPT's confidential information based on the following grounds as stated in the Motion:
‘ (1) Mr. Holmberg is the CEO of a company engaged in the active matrix LCD display business. LPL's attempt to
distinguish l\/lr. l—iolmberg's business on the particular silicon used (i.e., amorphous vs. polysilicon) is unavailing.
(2) Mr. I-lolmberg is not merely an expert consultant doing business in the LCD industry, as LPL incorrectly states
in its Opposition, but he is the owner and operator of a b_usiness entity that directly competes with CPT in the active matrix
LCD industry. Mr. Holmberg will not be able to separate CPT's confidential business and technical information from his
own knowledge in his daily decision making for his company. ‘
(3) Mr. Holmberg is a prolific patent generator in the active matrix LCD area. LPL has already asserted one of his
patents, the '002 patent, against CPT in this case. Mr. l-lolmberg will not be able to compartrnentalize CPT's confidential Q
information in his daily inventive activities involving the active matrix LCD technology.
Therefore, CPT respectfully requests that this Court grant the Motion and prohibit Mr. Holmberg from accessing
CPT's confidential information. i
Respectfully submitted,
fsf Matthew W. King (#4566)
Matthew W. King ’
E—mai1: [email protected] . Z
Direct Dial; (302) 651-7881 `
Direct Fax: (302) 778-7881 ` ?
Richards, Layton & Finger, P. A. ,
One Rodney Square
920 N. King Street ;
Wilrnirigton, DE l980]
Firm Phone: (302) 651-7700 ( ?
Firm Fax: (302) 65 I -7701
vlrw‘w.rlf`.com j