Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 1 of 6

From: Andrew L Schaeffer [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 6:33 PM To: Billie - Middlebury, CT Flaherty Cc: Bertoglio, Brad (Assoc-Chi-IP); Dilworth, Michael - Middlebury, CT; Mann, Janet - Middlebury, CT Subject: Re: E-mail from Janet Mann Dear Billie, Thanks for your further response. Sorry for using the wrong phone and calling your work phone by mistake. In any event it would appear that we won't be able to work this out before the hearing on Tuesday. We appreciate your comments but believe that we have a fundamental difference on what happened so it may be best for the Court to hear from both sides. We remain available to consider a joint letter of clarification to clear up any potential confusion in the marketplace but we can't agree to the broader conditions you have outlined. Thanks for taking the time to consider a means to resolve this matter without Court involvement even if that won't be possible. Have a nice weekend. Andy -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message ----From: "Flaherty, Billie - Middlebury, CT" [[email protected]] Sent: 09/08/2006 06:59 PM To: Andrew L Schaeffer Cc: Subject: Re: E-mail from Janet Mann

Andy, I apologize for the confusion. I thought that I had indicated the phone number where I could be reached at the end of my last email. With respect to the particulars of your response, we cannot agree to either of your two conditions. First, it is due to DuPont's actions in the marketplace that have caused us to incur the costs necessary to file the TRO motion. I cannot agree to now withdraw without an agreement in hand. That would not only cause me to potentially incur additional costs to refile but also would potentialy suggest to this Court incorrectly that there is no urgency to this matter. We can agree to act with speed to reach an agreement and then to dismiss, but we cannot dismiss first. Second, we cannot agree even to #1 if you cannot agree to "not do it

1

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 2 of 6

again" as I have suggested in #4. Again, I cannot go through all of this expense only to have to possible refile because Dupont chooses to conduct itself similarly in a market other than Taiwan during the pendency of this action. Andy, we stand ready to work on an agrred upon statement, but we cannot agree with your conditions before we do so. You may continue to correspond vis email or you may reach me by phone at 203-268-3659. Thanks, Billie -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message ----From: Andrew L Schaeffer To: Flaherty, Billie - Middlebury, CT Cc: [email protected] ; Mann, Janet - Middlebury, CT; Dilworth, Michael - Middlebury, CT Sent: Fri Sep 08 18:04:21 2006 Subject: Re: E-mail from Janet Mann

Dear Billie, Thank you for providing me with Chemtura's response to Cindy Green's proposal. I tried to reach you by phone but since I only got your work voicemail I am responding via email to try and move this along as quickly as possible. We seem to be on the same page on trying to resolve this matter without involvement of the Court. However, while we can agree with items #1 and #3 below, we cannot agree with item #4. Moreover, we cannot agree with item #2 if withdrawal can't be agreed to today. In essence, in order to avoid further work preparing for next Tuesday's hearing we need Chemtura's written and immediate agreement to withdrawal the TRO/PI motion without prejudice. Otherwise, we'll be forced to do the same work this weekend in parallel with working on a joint statement and/or other written agreement. In the past DuPont has been very generous to Great Lakes/Chemtura on extensions of time and you have agreed to reciprocate as well on future requests from DuPont. We see this request to withdrawal without prejudice as the same thing since Chemtura would still be free to refile the motion later in time if we couldn't ultimately resolve this matter. DuPont feels strongly that it has done nothing wrong in sending its 7/7/06 letter which was intended to deal with unauthorized distributors which might be impacted by DuPont's Taiwanese patent. Nothing was said in regard to Great Lakes/Chemtura. In addition, the translation you rely on in your brief is quite different than the certified translation which is attached as Exhibit D to your brief. Therefore, we're not quite sure how the properly translated letter has caused problems for Great Lakes/Chemtura. However, to alleviate any problems you perceive we are willing to work with your outside counsel to work out a suitable joint statement that would go to appropriate recipients. Please let me know if you can agree to drop item #4 as well as give DuPont an immediate withdrawal so that our outside counsel can stop work on a TRO/PI response and turn their attention to quickly work out a suitable joint statement with Brad Bertoglio of Greenberg Traurig. Thanks for your consideration. Andy

2

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 3 of 6

"Flaherty, Billie - Middlebury, CT" 09/08/2006 04:32 PM To Andrew L Schaeffer/AE/DuPont@DuPont cc , "Dilworth, Michael - Middlebury, CT" , "Mann, Janet - Middlebury, CT" Subject Re: E-mail from Janet Mann

Andy, We have considered the proposal made by Cynthia to Janet to resolve the matters raised by our TRO/PI motion and our response is as follows: 1). We can agree to work with DuPont on a joint statement and a list of appropriate recipients aimed at correcting the record with respect to GLCC's legitimate manufacture and sale of HFC-227. Brad Bertoglio of Greenberg Traurig is ready to begin work with your outside counsel to prepare such a statement for our review. 2). We cannot agree to withdraw our motion today, but we will agree to withdraw it upon agreement with respect to #1 above. 3) We can agree that the joint statement will not be admissible in the current litigation. However, we must reserve the right to use it in any litigation, for example, commenced by DuPont against any of our customers or our customers' customers. 4). Finally, we also need a written agreement with DuPont wherein DuPont agrees not to have any communications similar to those at issue in our motion with any other actual or prospective customer of GLCC during the pendency of this litigation. Andy, please advise whether you are willing to proceed on this basis. You can reach me by email or by phone at 203-268-3659. Thanks, Billie -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message ----From: Andrew L Schaeffer To: Flaherty, Billie - Middlebury, CT Sent: Fri Sep 08 15:22:53 2006 Subject: Fw: E-mail from Janet Mann

Dear Billie, Cindy Green would prefer that you and I talk about resolving the TRO/PI motion issue as outlined below. Would you call me in my office (302) 774-3851 or on my cell phone (302) 898-2069 when you get a chance. If you are busy right now, could you please let me know when to call today and/or how I can reach you over the weekend.

3

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 4 of 6

Thanks, Andy

Andrew L. Schaeffer Corporate Counsel - IP Litigation Group Leader E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. DuPont Legal - D-4034-3 1007 Market Street Wilmington, DE 19898 (302) 774-3851 (work phone) (302) 773-5952 (work fax) [email protected] ----- Forwarded by Andrew L Schaeffer/AE/DuPont on 09/08/2006 03:19 PM ----Sara B Miller/AE/DuPont 09/08/2006 02:58 PM To Andrew L Schaeffer/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Greg M Rubin/DuPont@DuPont cc Cynthia C Green/AE/DuPont@DuPont Subject E-mail from Janet Mann

FYI ----- Forwarded by Sara B Miller/AE/DuPont on 09/08/2006 02:57 PM ----"Mann, Janet - Middlebury, CT" 09/08/2006 01:59 PM To Cynthia C Green/AE/DuPont@DuPont cc "Flaherty, Billie - Middlebury, CT" Subject Re: Great Lakes' Motion

Cindy, Thanks for your response. I am unfortunately sitting on board an airplane that is due to take off in 5 minutes and won't land until after hours. In answer to your question about our interest to pursue the longer term option. That is yes and we should set a time to meet and discuss. Regarding the more immdeiate issue, I have asked Billie Flaherty to contact you or your counsel to see if we could work out something that meets both our needs over the weekend. I will check email when I land. Sorry we could not connect immeduately.

4

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 5 of 6

Regards Janet Mann -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message ----From: Sara B Miller To: Mann, Janet - Middlebury, CT Cc: Cynthia C Green Sent: Fri Sep 08 13:11:21 2006 Subject: Great Lakes' Motion Hi Janet, TGIF and hope you are doing well. We should plan to talk in a couple of weeks and get caught up. I am travelling next week and then need to meet with my team, but Thierry and I would like to give you an update on our progress relative to the broader opportunity to work together. We continue to push forward on the concept and I'd like to make sure this is still of interest to Chemtura before we go much further. We can talk on that later though. In the meantime, I understand there is another event looming and got a brief update from my team today . I wanted to send you this note before I left town in an attempt to resolve this issue relative to Great Lakes' motion. Let me know what you think of this approach. I will be checking e-mail as I travel, and my folks will also be in the office if you want to talk directly to them. I understand this is urgent given the Tuesday court hearing. First and foremost, we continue to want to settle all matters and also free up the valuable resources that are working on the legal issues. And while DuPont does not believe that it has engaged in any wrongdoing, we would like to offer a proposed solution. 1. DuPont and Great Lakes/Chemtura will promptly prepare and release to the appropriate parties a joint statement aimed at removing any perceived confusion regarding the communication referred to in Great Lakes' motion; 2. Great Lakes/Chemtura will withdraw today its motion without prejudice; and 3. DuPont and Great Lakes/Chemtura will agree that the joint communication and its contents may not be used for any purpose in the current litigation or any other related litigation. Hopefully this is acceptable to Chemtura and we can resolve and move forward. I will fax to your office also. Regards, Cindy Green VP/GM DuPont Fluroproducts This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be Privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does

5

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv-01452-JJF

Document 72-2

Filed 09/11/2006

Page 6 of 6

not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html >

This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be Privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html

This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be Privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html

6

EXHIBIT A