Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-01278-KAJ Document 347 Filed 06/05/2006 Page 1 of 2
YOUNG CONAWAY S TARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP
§§§$駥r2*‘°*" ?§t%‘£‘EE%1¥%:““ · THE BRANDYIVHIEBUILDING é1i2.;t;$t‘é§t%Eir
SHELDON N. SANDLER ROBERT S. BRADY ]()()() WEST STREET 17TH FLOOR JOSEPH M. BARRY ANDREW A. LUNDGREN
RICHARD A. LEvINE JOEL A. \\/AITE ’ SEAN M. BEACH MATTI-LEw B. LLNN
RICHARD A. ZAPPA BRENT C. SHAFFER WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 1 9 80 1. DONALD J. BOWMAN, JK JOSEPH A. MALFITANO
FREDERICK W. IOEST DANIEL P. JOHNSON TIMOTHY P. CAIRNS ADRIA B. MARTINELLI
RICHARD Iii NQORSE P.O. BOX 391 %ARgH.A¤—IA;ON§ SOYLE RTTEHAEL WL ¥i(;]DER.\i0Tl’
.’ .1 A 'AY "EAL y y 1. r.II.¥. 1 R1 .I '
§?,;;L€.§1. r1..§.AS.rE12t; WILM¤~¤r¤N DFLMVME 19899·<>39I r1.tt;1?";§w t “ EDNIOEELDLIORTOELLA
CRAIG A. KARSNITZ PAULINE K MORGAN (307) 57 1 _66OO ERIN EDWARDS D. PON MUTrM.LARA·\\’.ALRER
BARRY M. WILLOUGHBY C. BARR FLINN " KENNETH J. ENOS JENNIFER R. NOEL
Josv W. INGEFSOLL NATALIE WOLF (800) 253-2234 (DE ONLY) IAN S.FRE1>ERIC1·:S ADAM W. POFF
ANTHONY G. Frwm LISA B. GOODMAN FAX; (302) 57 T _T 253 JAMES J. GALLAGHER SETH J. REIDENBERG
JEROME K. GROSSLLAN JOHN W. SHAW SEAN T. GREECHER MICHELE SHERRETTA
ECGENE A. DIPRINZIO JAMES P. HUGHES, JR ··T· STEFHANIE L. HANSEN MONTE T. SOUIRE
JAMES L. PATTON, JR EDWIN J. PLARRON DAITN M. JONES MICHAEL P. STAFFORD
ROBERT L. THOMAS MICHAEL R. NESTOR WWW.YOUNGCONAWAYCOM RICHARD S. JULIE CHAD S.C. STOVER (SC ONLY)
\VILLlA.\I D. JOHNSTON MAUREEN D. LUKE KAREN E. KELLER JOHN E. TRACEY
TIMOTHY J. SNYDER ROLIN P. BISSELL JENNIFER M. KINKUS MARGARET B. WVHITEMAN
BRUCE L. SILVERSTEIN Scorr A. HOLT DIRECT DIAL: (302) 571-6689 EDWARD KOSMOWSK1 SHARON M. ZIEG
Iiimftxsttft i‘1f*;tE1.2%t£;..A DIRECT F»~><¤ <3<>2> 576-3334 PP °· Nm
RICHARD A. DILIBERTO. JR. CHRISTIAN DOUGLAS \VR.lGHT EMAIL: [email protected]
MELANIE K SHARP DANIELLE GIBBS SPECIAL COUNSEL SENIOR COUNSEL
CASSANORA F. ROBERTS JOHN J. PASCHEWO JOHN D. MCLAIJGHLIN, JR CURTIS J. CRO\\`Tl·{ER
RICHARD JA. POFFER NORMAN M. POWELL ELENA C. NORMAN
TERESA A. CHEER KAREN L. PASCALE OF COUNSEL
PATRICIA A. WIODOSS STUART B. YOUNG
EDWARD B. MAxwvELL. 2ND
June 5, 2006
BY CM/ECF AND HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Kent A. Jordan _
United States District Court
844 N. King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Cgovac, Inc. v. Pechiney Plastic Packagng, Inc.. C.A. No. 04—l278—KAJ
Dear Judge Jordan:
We submit this letter on behalf of plaintiff Cryovac, Inc., for this morning’s teleconference.
Cryovac asks that you compel the presence at trial during Cryovac’s case—in—chief of Robert Taylor,
Vice President and General Manager — Meat and Dairy of Pechiney. (See Tab l (describing Mr.
Taylor)). Mr. Taylor is the central character in Pechiney’s development and sale of its infringing
Clearshield® product. He initiated the proj ect, was in charge ofthe business unit which carried out
the proj ect, approved (along with others) the capital appropriation for the proj ect, and was directly
involved with National Beef in interference with Cryovac’s existing contract with National Beef He
is central to the issues oftortious interference, willful inhingement, damages, and is also relevant to
issues regarding validity of the patent.
Cryovac advised Pechiney that it intended to call Mr. Taylor in its case—in-chief and asked
that he be present on I une 12 to be an early witness. Pechiney responded initially that it intended to
call Mr. Taylor in its case—in—chief and suggested that he be called later in Cryovac’s case so that he
would not need to be in Delaware for a protracted time. Later Pechiney changed its position and said
that it would not produce Mr. Taylor during Cryovac’s case because he is not subj ect to a subpoena
but might call him during Pechiney’s case.
While Cryovac has deposed Mr. Taylor and can play a video of his deposition, we believe
that the jury is entitled to see the central character in Pechiney’s infringing proj ect in person during
Cryovac’s case·in—chief. Cryovac has subpoenaed Mr. Taylor through Pechiney’ s agent for service
of process in Delaware, but believes that in any event the Court should instruct Pechiney to produce
Mr. Taylor for Cryovac’s case in chief on I une l2.
Subpoenas are valid when addressed to parties and officers of a party, even when the witness
must travel further than 100 miles to the courthouse. See, e.g., N WL Holdings, Inc. v. Eden Ctr.,
Inc. {In re Ames Dep’t Stores, Inc. Q, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 1027 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2004) (holding
DB0l:2l 12783.1 063527.100l

Case 1:04-cv—01278-KAJ Document 347 Filed 06/05/2006 Page 2 of 2
YouNo CoNAwAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP
The Honorable Kent A. Jordan
June 5, 2006
Page 2
that the text and history of Ped. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) dictate that geographic restrictions on
subpoenas are not applicable to parties and officers) (distinguishing contrary cases) (Tab 2);
American Fed’n of Gov’t Employees, Local 922 v. Ashcroft, 354 P. Supp. 2d 909, 915 (E.D. Ark.
2003) ("The majority of courts to consider the issue have held that a court may compel the trial
testimony of parties and, where the party is a corporation or entity, the party’ s hi gh-level employees
or officers, even when the person to be compelled resides beyond the 100-mile range for
subpoenas.") (collecting cases); Ferrell v. LBP, Inc., 2000 WL 34032907 (N .D. Iowa Apr. 28, 2000)
(denying motion to quash trial subpoena on two "high~ranking officers" of defendant) (relying on
Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) and collecting cases) (Tab 3); Stone v. Morton Int’1, Inc., 170 F.R.D. 498, 500-
01 (D. Utah 1997) (treating managing agents to officers and holding that Rule 45 extends subpoena
power to party officers, regardless of location).
Respectfully submitted,
A£,p ,. . K) I
w. shaw
la 3362
cc: Clerk of the Court (by hand delivery) ‘
N. Richard Powers (by CM/ECF and hand delivery)
oaoizzimxsi oszszviom