Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 1 of 43 Model for Letters of Request recommended for use in applying the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters 5HTXHVWIRU,QWHUQDWLRQDO-XGLFLDO$VVLVWDQFHSXUVXDQWWRWKH+DJXH&RQYHQWLRQRI 0DUFKRQWKH7DNLQJRI(YLGHQFH$EURDGLQ&LYLORU&RPPHUFLDO0DWWHUV N.B. Under the first paragraph of Article 4, the Letter of Request shall be in the language of the authority requested to execute it or be accompanied by a translation into that language. However, the provisions of the second and third paragraphs may permit use of English, French or another language. In order to avoid confusion, please spell out the name of the month in each date. Please fill out an original and one copy of this form (use additional space if required). 6HQGHUDavid Eiseman Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, California 94111 U.S.A. (415) 875-6600 &HQWUDO$XWKRULW\RI Supreme Court of Singapore WKH5HTXHVWHG6WDWH 1 Supreme Court Lane Singapore 178879 +(65) 6336 0644 3HUVRQWRZKRPWKH David Eiseman H[HFXWHGUHTXHVWLV Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP WREHUHWXUQHG 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, California 94111 U.S.A. (415) 875-6600 6SHFLILFDWLRQRIWKHGDWHE\ZKLFKWKHUHTXHVWLQJDXWKRULW\UHTXLUHVUHFHLSWRIWKH UHVSRQVHWRWKH/HWWHURI5HTXHVW 'DWH June 30, 2020 5HDVRQIRUXUJHQF\ All depositions and document productions in this litigation must be completed by the deadline for the close of fact discovery. Pursuant to the Case Management Order attached hereto as Attachment A, the deadline for the close of fact discovery is the later of June 30, 2020 or 90 days after the Claim Construction Order (CCO). See Attachment A at 3. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2PLWLIQRWDSSOLFDEOH Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 2 of 43 ,1&21)250,7<:,7+$57,&/(2)7+(&219(17,217+(81'(56,*1(' $33/,&$17+$67+(+212857268%0,77+()2//2:,1*5(48(67 a 5HTXHVWLQJMXGLFLDO The Honorable Donna M. Ryu DXWKRULW\ $UWLFOHa) United States District Court Northern District of California Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building & United States Courthouse 1301 Clay Street Oakland, California 94612 U.S.A. b 7RWKHFRPSHWHQW The Republic of Singapore DXWKRULW\RI $UWLFOHa) Supreme Court of Singapore 1 Supreme Court Lane Singapore 178879 +(65) 6336 0644 c 1DPHVRIWKHFDVH Semicaps PTE, Ltd. v. Hamamatsu Corp., et al., DQGDQ\LGHQWLI\LQJ Case No. 17-cv-03440-DMR QXPEHU 1DPHVDQGDGGUHVVHVRIWKH SDUWLHVDQGWKHLUUHSUHVHQWD WLYHV LQFOXGLQJUHSUHVHQWD WLYHVLQWKHUHTXHVWHG6WDWH $UWLFOHb) a 3ODLQWLII SEMICAPS Pte, Ltd. 28 Ayer Rajah Crescent #03-01 Singapore 139959 5HSUHVHQWDWLYHV Ryan Marton & Hector Ribera Marton Ribera Schumann & Chang LLP 548 Market Street, Suite 36117 San Francisco, California 94104, U.S.A. b 'HIHQGDQW The names and addresses of the Defendants are provided in Attachment B. 5HSUHVHQWDWLYHV The names and addresses of the Representatives for the Defendants are provided in Attachment B. c 2WKHUSDUWLHV N/A. 5HSUHVHQWDWLYHV N/A. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2PLWLIQRWDSSOLFDEOH Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 3 of 43 a 1DWXUHRIWKH Alleged patent infringement under the patent SURFHHGLQJV GLYRUFH lawsoftheUnitedStates,35U.S.C.§1etseq., SDWHUQLW\EUHDFKRI specifically including 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), (b), and FRQWUDFWSURGXFW (c). OLDELOLW\HWF $UWLFOHc) b 6XPPDU\RIFRPSODLQW Plaintiff alleges that Defendants infringe U.S. Patent No. 7,623,982 (the “’982 patent”), entitled “Method of Testing an Electronic Circuit and Apparatus Thereof.” c 6XPPDU\RIGHIHQFH Defendants assert, inter alia, that they do not DQGFRXQWHUFODLP infringe any of the claims of the ’982; that the claims of the ’982 patent are invalid and unenforceable under at least 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, 112, 116, and/or 256 and due to inequitable conduct; and that Plaintiff's claims are barred due to equitable estoppel and/or because Defendants are licensed under the '982 patent. d 2WKHUQHFHVVDU\LQIRUPDWLRQ This litigation is governed by the Protective Order RUGRFXPHQWV entered by Judge Ryu on March 26, 2020 (Dkt. No. 91). This Protective Order governs the disclosure of confidential documents, testimony, and any other evidence in connection with this action. A copy of the Protective Order is attached hereto as Attachment C. a (YLGHQFHWREHREWDLQHG RURWKHUMXGLFLDODFWWR Defendants request the deposition of Dr. Alfred Cheng Teck Quah and documents from Dr. Quah EHSHUIRUPHG $UWLFOHd) that are relevant to Defendants' claims and defences. b 3XUSRVHRIWKHHYLGHQFH RUMXGLFLDODFWVRXJKW The requested evidence will be used to support Defendants' claims and defences. ,GHQWLW\DQGDGGUHVVRI Dr. Alfred Cheng Teck Quah ("Dr. Quah") DQ\SHUVRQWREHH[DPLQHG 60 Woodlands Industrial $UWLFOHe) Park D Street 2 Singapore 738406 4XHVWLRQVWREHSXWWRWKH A list of deposition topics pertaining to the SHUVRQVWREHH[DPLQHGRU subject matter of Dr. Quah's deposition are VWDWHPHQWRIWKHVXEMHFW provided in Attachment D. PDWWHUDERXWZKLFKWKH\DUH WREHH[DPLQHG $UWLFOHf) BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2PLWLIQRWDSSOLFDEOH Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 4 of 43 'RFXPHQWVRURWKHUSURSHUW\ A list of documents that Defendants request from WREHLQVSHFWHG Dr. Quah are provided in Attachment E. $UWLFOHg) Defendants have been unable to procure these documents from Plaintiff SEMICAPS Pte Ltd., which has taken the position that it has no control over Dr. Quah and the documents in Dr. Quah's possession. $Q\UHTXLUHPHQWWKDWWKH Any evidence and deposition testimony shall be HYLGHQFHEHJLYHQRQRDWK given under oath in the presence of an officer RUDIILUPDWLRQDQGDQ\ duly authorized to administer oaths in Singapore. VSHFLDOIRUPWREHXVHG $UWLFOHh) In the event that evidence and deposition testimony is not provided in the manner requested, such evidence and deposition testimony shall be taken in such manner as provided by the laws of Singapore. 6SHFLDOPHWKRGVRUSURFHGXUH Defendants, by and through their attorneys, will WREHIROORZHG HJRUDORU take the deposition upon oral examination of Dr. LQZULWLQJYHUEDWLP Quah. Plaintiff, by and through its attorneys, may WUDQVFULSWRUVXPPDU\ conduct an oral cross-examination of Dr. Quah. FURVVH[DPLQDWLRQHWF The deposition shall be recorded using audio $UWLFOHVi)DQG visual equipment, including interactive, real time transcription. The deposition shall be recorded and transcribed verbatim. A verbatim transcript of the deposition shall be created and provided to Dr. Quah to review and certify the truth and accuracy of the transcription. The deposition shall take place from day-to-day until completed. 5HTXHVWIRUQRWLILFDWLRQRI Defendants respectfully request that Dr. Quah be WKHWLPHDQGSODFHIRUWKH notified of the time and place for this Request to H[HFXWLRQRIWKH5HTXHVW be executed. Dr. Quah's address is as follows: DQGLGHQWLW\DQGDGGUHVVRI DQ\SHUVRQWREHQRWLILHG Dr. Alfred Cheng Teck Quah $UWLFOH 60 Woodlands Industrial Park D Street 2 Singapore 738406 5HTXHVWIRUDWWHQGDQFHRU SDUWLFLSDWLRQRIMXGLFLDO N/A. SHUVRQQHORIWKHUHTXHVWLQJ DXWKRULW\DWWKHH[HFXWLRQ RIWKH/HWWHURI5HTXHVW $UWLFOH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2PLWLIQRWDSSOLFDEOH Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 5 of 43 6SHFLILFDWLRQRISULYLOHJH The following privileges shall apply to the RUGXW\WRUHIXVHWRJLYH evidence and testimony provided: attorney-client HYLGHQFHXQGHUWKHODZRI privilege; attorney work product immunity; WKH6WDWHRIRULJLQ common interest privilege; and/or other privilege $UWLFOHb) or immunity applicable to the evidence and testimony provided. 7KHIHHVDQGFRVWVLQFXUUHG David Eiseman ZKLFKDUHUHLPEXUVDEOHXQGHU Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP WKHVHFRQGSDUDJUDSKRI 50 California Street, 22nd Floor $UWLFOHRUXQGHU San Francisco, California 94111 $UWLFOHRIWKH&RQYHQWLRQ U.S.A. ZLOOEHERUQHE\ '$7(2)5(48(67 6,*1$785($1'6($/2)7+( 5(48(67,1*$87+25,7< Erase all entries Print BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2PLWLIQRWDSSOLFDEOH Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 6 of 43 $77$&+0(17$ Case 4:17-cv-03440-DMR Document 102 Filed 07/01/20 Page 7 of 43 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SEMICAPS PTE LTD, Case No. 17-cv-03440-DMR 8 Plaintiff, CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER 9 v. 10 HAMAMATSU CORPORATION, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 The court held an initial case management conference on May 1, 2019. A further case 13 management conference is set for September 4, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. The parties shall file their joint 14 case management statement by August 28, 2019. 15 The court adopted the parties’ proposal regarding discovery, as set forth below: 16 The parties agree that attorney-client privileged communications and work product created 17 after June 14, 2017 do not need to be included on a privilege log. United States District Court In addition, the parties agree that communications and drafts exchanged between counsel Northern District of California Northern 18 19 and the experts in this case are not discoverable. Communications between the parties or 20 representatives of the parties (other than counsel) with the expert will be discoverable only to the 21 extent relied upon by the expert. The normal rules regarding inadvertent disclosure of privileged materials found in the 22 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, e.g. FRCP 26, and the Federal Rules of Evidence, e.g. FRE 502, 23 shall apply to this action. 24 Depositions 25 Fact Discovery: 70 hours of deposition, inclusive of 30(b)(6) depositions and third-party 26 depositions, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil