Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 1 of 8
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 5:21 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Dunner, Don; [email protected] Subject: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, Civil Action No. 04-876GMS
Viviane Simon France Telecom 38-40, rue du Général Leclerc 92794 Issy-les-Moulineaux Cedex 9 Dear Ms. Simon: As you may recall, we are lawyers for Cisco Systems and Lucent Technologies in lawsuits brought by Telcordia Technologies against Cisco, Alcatel and Lucent. The lawsuits are for the alleged infringement by Cisco, Alcatel and Lucent of certain Telcordia's patents, including one patent directed to the "SRTS" technique. Last year, you attended the depositions taken by Alcatel and Telcordia of three current and former France Telecom engineers -Messrs. Adam, Cochennec and Houdoin -- who were involved in early work on SRTS. At a recent hearing, the Judge in our cases asked that Cisco and Lucent (Alcatel's case is on-hold for now) request that France Telecom make Mr. Houdoin, who we understand to be currently employed at France Telecom, available for one additional day of deposition in Paris. As a result of the scheduling for Mr. Houdoin's deposition last year, Telcordia believes it did not have an opportunity to complete its questioning of Mr. Houdoin and would like an opportunity to complete that questioning now. The Judge has asked that we request France Telecom to provide that opportunity. Of course, if Mr. Houdoin can come to Paris for deposition, we will schedule this deposition at a time convenient for him and arrange for his expenses to be paid. Please contact us at your earliest convenience to advise whether we can proceed with Mr. Houdoin's deposition and, if so, when Mr. Houdoin can be made available. The trial is scheduled to start on April 30, so this is time-sensitive. In addition, the Judge has stated a preference that Messrs. Adam, Cochennec and/or Houdoin appear in person to testify in our cases. We also request that you consider whether these individuals would be willing to travel to the United States to testify at the trial, which as noted above begins on April 30 in Delaware. Again, we will arrange for their expenses to be paid. Please advise. For their information we are copying Telcordia's counsel and Alcatel's counsel on this email. Best, Edward R. Reines Weil Gotshal & Manges Counsel for Defendant, Cisco Systems, Inc. Steven C. Cherny Latham & Watkins Counsel for Defendant, Lucent Technologies Inc.
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 2 of 8
From: "SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS" [[email protected]] Sent: 04/06/2007 11:05 AM ZE2 To: Edward Reines Cc:
Best, Viviane Simon Responsable de Groupe Ingénieurs Brevets MAPS Mandataire OEB France Télécom Recherche & Développement/PIV/ Brevets 38-40, rue du Général Leclerc 92794 Issy Moulineaux Cedex 9 France tél. +33 (0)1 45 29 55 68 fax + 33 (0)1 45 29 65 39 [email protected] Ph. D. Viviane Simon Patent Manager for IBMAPS European patent Attorney France Télécom Recherche & Développement/PIV/ Brevets 38-40, rue du Général Leclerc 92794 Issy Moulineaux Cedex 9 France tél. +33 (0)1 45 29 55 68 fax + 33 (0)1 45 29 65 39 [email protected]
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 3 of 8
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 10:13 PM To: SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS Cc: Steven C. Cherny; Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder Subject: Re: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilAction No. 04-876GMS Dear Ms. Simon, Thank you very much for your prompt response. Neither the deposition of Mr. Houdoin in Paris nor the appearance of Messrs. Adam, Cochennec and Houdoin at the trial in the United States are "mandatory" although the Judge stated he expected that Mr. Houdoin would appear for another deposition and that he was "distress[ed]" to hear that these important witnesses may not appear in person at trial. The Judge would appreciate France Telecom's cooperation and ordered Cisco and Lucent to ask France Telecom to make these witnesses available but acknowledged that he "can't order France Telecom to do a thing" and that he "understand[s] the constraints of international litigation . " I hope this responds to the question you asked. Thank you for your consideration. Best, Edward Reines
From: HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 9:16 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Steven C. Cherny; Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder; SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS Subject: RE: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilActionNo. 04-876GMS Mr. Reines, Viviane Simon called me earlier this morning, and transferred your demand. In this case, France Telecom will let the decision to myself. I am will to cooperate, but in order to get a precise answer, I need some information. 1) If I decide to testify in Paris, will my presence requested at the trial ? 2) If I decide to go to the USA for the trial, will my testimony in Paris be necessary ? 3) Could you give me some information about the trial dates ? You wrote that the trial will begin on April 30th, but how long will it last, and when if I decide to go to the USA, will my physical presence be necessary ? Best regards, Thierry Houdoin
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 4 of 8
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:02 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Dunner, Don; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, Civil Action No. 04876-GMS Mr. Houdoin: We are writing you directly with the understanding that you and Ms. Simon find that acceptable. If there is any concern about this, you and/or Ms. Simon should let us know right away. Thank you for your prompt response and general willingness to cooperate. You have asked about a Paris deposition relative to a trial appearance in the United States. Cisco, Lucent, Telcordia and the Court all have expressed a preference for live testimony at trial compared to deposition testimony, so we would ask you to attend trial live. We believe it is unreasonable to ask you to testify in deposition in the next two weeks, if you are gracious enough to attend the trial. You also asked about the timing of trial and your testimony. The trial starts on April 30 and is expected to last about two weeks. We would make every effort to accommodate your schedule. May 7 or 8 would be dates that would likely work for your trial testimony. We would minimize the amount of time in Delaware for you. As noted previously, the parties would compensate you for your travel to the United States. Thank you again for your predisposition to cooperate. Please let us know how you would like to proceed and we can work out the specifics. Best, Edward R. Reines Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Tel (650) 802-3022 Fax (650) 802-3100
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 5 of 8
From: Williamson, John Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:22 PM To: [email protected] Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Dunner, Don Subject: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, Civil Action No. 04-876GMS
Ed, Your recent email to Mr. Houdoin is entirely inconsistent with the Court's ruling during the March 30, 2006, pretrial conference. As you know, our motion in limine that prompted the Court's ruling was a motion that sought to preclude the defendants from using Mr. Houdoin's deposition testimony because Telcordia did not have an adequate opportunity to crossexamine Mr. Houdoin during his deposition. The Court thus ordered the defendants to ask France Telecom whether it would voluntarily make Mr. Houdoin available for another day of deposition. Specifically, the Court stated: "Counsel need to work cooperatively, when he [Mr. Houdoin] is made available to appear. They [Telcordia] have indicated they need a day. So that shouldn't require any further meeting with him [Mr. Houdoin] on the day of the designated deposition. A day means seven hours of testimony. That is the Court's ruling." While the Court also expressed its preference that Mr. Houdoin appear live at trial (and acknowledged that this may not be possible due to the constraints of international litigation), the issue of whether Mr. Houdoin ultimately chooses to appear in the United States for trial is entirely independent of Telcordia's effort to seek additional deposition time with Mr. Houdoin. The Court ordered the parties to work together to seek additional deposition time with Mr. Houdoin, and nothing in the Court's ruling suggests that Mr. Houdoin may appear for trial testimony in lieu of an additional day of deposition. Your instruction to Mr. Houdoin that if he appears at trial, Telcordia would not be entitled to the additional day of deposition testimony that was discussed at the hearing, is at odds with the Court's ruling. Telcordia maintains its position that if the defendants plan to use Mr. Houdoin's testimony at trial - either live testimony or deposition testimony - then Telcordia must first be afforded additional deposition time with Mr. Houdoin. We would like to schedule that deposition to take place next week. Regards, John
John M. WilliamsonAttorney at LawFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001-4413 202.408.4282fax 202.408.4000 [email protected]
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 6 of 8
From: SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:52 AM To: [email protected]; HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN Cc: Dunner, Don; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilAction No. 04876-GMS Dear all: For your information, we have given Mr Houdoin our consent for writing you directly under the condition that I am copied.
Best, Viviane Simon Responsable de Groupe Ingénieurs Brevets MAPS Mandataire OEB France Télécom Recherche & Développement/PIV/ Brevets 38-40, rue du Général Leclerc 92794 Issy Moulineaux Cedex 9 France tél. +33 (0)1 45 29 55 68 fax + 33 (0)1 45 29 65 39 [email protected] Ph. D. Viviane Simon Patent Manager for IBMAPS European patent Attorney France Télécom Recherche & Développement/PIV/ Brevets 38-40, rue du Général Leclerc 92794 Issy Moulineaux Cedex 9 France tél. +33 (0)1 45 29 55 68 fax + 33 (0)1 45 29 65 39 [email protected]
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 10:17 AM To: SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS; HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN Cc: Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder; Steven C. Cherny Subject: Re: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilAction No. 04-876GMS Dear Ms. Simon: Thank you for your courtesy. Best, Ed
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 7 of 8
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 10:20 AM To: HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN Cc: Steven C. Cherny; Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder; SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS; Williamson, John Subject: Re: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilActionNo. 04-876GMS Mr. Houdoin: I apologize for the attorney argument to which you have been exposed. Because the Judge makes the decisions, we plan on promptly contacting the Judge to understand from him what will be expected of you under the different scenarios. You deserve a clear answer. A prolonged debate between the attorneys on this subject will not satisfy anyone. We plan to get back to you soon. Best, Ed
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 4:20 AM To: HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN Cc: Steven C. Cherny; Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder; SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS; Williamson, John Subject: Re: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilActionNo. 04-876GMS Mr. Houdoin:
As explained in my last email, we are asking Judge Sleet for clarification as to whether, if you agree to attend trial in the United States, he would ask that you also sit for deposition beforehand. The parties have agreed to present that issue to the judge this Friday for decision. As you know, we all hope you can attend trial live and expect to have the answer to you on Friday on the deposition issue. Best, Ed
Case 1:04-cv-00876-GMS
Document 332-2
Filed 04/19/2007
Page 8 of 8
From: HOUDOIN Thierry RD-CORE-LAN [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 5:35 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Steven C. Cherny; Dunner, Don; Stuart J. Sinder; SIMON Viviane RD-PIV-ISS; Williamson, John Subject: RE: Telcordia v. Cisco, Civil Action No. 04-875-GMS; Telcordia v. Lucent, CivilActionNo. 04-876GMS Mr. Reines, Thank you for your answer. I am waiting for the Judge position next Friday, and after that, I will give you my answer about travelling to the USA for the trial. Nethertheless, I would say that, if I should go to Paris for a testimony before the trial, the timing will be very tight Best regards, Thierry Houdoin
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms