Free Reply Brief - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-01436-JJF Document 47-2 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
ST. CLAIR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY )
CONSULTANTS, INC. )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. O4-1436 JJF
)
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG )
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, L.P., )
MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., ) 1
LTD., MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC CORPORATION )
OP AMERICA, VICTOR COMPANY OF JAPAN, )
LTD., JVC COMPANY OF AMERICA, NOKIA )
CORPORATION, NOKIA, INC., HEWLETT- )
PACKARD COMPANY, EASTMAN KODAK )
COMPANY, )
)
Defendants. )
)
)
DECLARATION OF KENNETH L. NISSLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO BIFURCATE AND EXPEDITIOUSLY PROCEED WITH THE OWNERSHIP ISSUE
IN THE PRESENT ACTION
I, Kenneth L. Nissly, declare as follows:
l. I am a member of the law {inn of Thelen Reid & Priest LLP, counsel
representing St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. ("St. Clair") in the Mirage Systems,
Inc. v. Speasl action pending in California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara (Case No.: I-
05-CV-039164). I am submitting this Declaration in support of Plaintiff s Motion to Bifurcate
and Expeditiously Proceed with the Ownership Issue in the Present Action in the above-
captioned action.
2. On June 17, 2005, I attended an ex parte hearing before Judge Jamie J acobs-May
at which Mirage Systems, Inc. (“Mirage") moved to substitute Eastman Kodak Company
MP3 20140315.1

Case 1:04-cv-01436-JJF Document 47-2 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 2 of 2
("Kodak") as plaintiff in the Mirage Systems, Inc. v. Speasl matter. The usual practice in the
Superior Court is that ex parte hearings are not transcribed, and that was the case on this
application.
4. At this hearing, I requested that Mirage ex parte application be denied so that the
parties could have an opportunity to brief the issue. I told Judge Jacobs-May that St. Clair’s
ownership of the patents was also at issue in the prior-filed action brought by St. Clair against
Kodak, and I submitted a highlighted copy of the complaint tiled by St. Clair in this matter.
5. Judge J acobs-May denied Mirage-:’s ex parte application and set the matter down
for hearing on August I6, 2005. During the discussion at the ex parte hearing Judge J acobs—May
mentioned that a stay of the Superior Court action might be appropriate if the same issues were
involved in the Delaware case.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Delaware and of the
United States that the foregoing is a true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Dated: June2_j2005 I
Kenneth L. Nissly
THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
225 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95113
MP3 20140315.]