Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 30554
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 1 of 13 PagelD #: 30554
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 16
`EXHIBIT 16
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 30555
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. 17-770-JDW-MPT
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`)))))))))
`
`WIRTGEN AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`CATERPILLAR INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`CATERPILLAR INC.’S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO
`WIRTGEN AMERICA, INC.’S SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-31)
`
`Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules
`
`of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (“Local Rules”), Defendant and
`
`Counterclaim-Plaintiff Caterpillar Inc. (“Caterpillar”) hereby responds
`
`to Plaintiff and
`
`Counterclaim-Defendant Wirtgen America, Inc.’s (“Wirtgen America”) Second Set of
`
`Interrogatories (Nos. 21-31) as follows.
`
`RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
`
`Caterpillar’s responses are based on information currently available to Caterpillar.
`
`Caterpillar reserves all rights to supplement, revise, and/or amend these responses should
`
`additional information become available through the discovery process or by other means.
`
`Caterpillar also reserves the right to produce or use any information or documents that are
`
`discovered after service of these responses in support of or in opposition to any motion, in
`
`depositions, or at hearings or trial. In responding to Wirtgen America’s Second Set of
`
`Interrogatories, Caterpillar does not waive any objection on the grounds of privilege,
`
`confidentiality, competency, relevance, materiality, authenticity, admissibility of the information
`
`contained in these responses, or any other objection.
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 30556
`
`Interrogatory as premature to the extent it seeks information before Caterpillar is required to
`
`identify and provide such information in accordance with the Scheduling Order.
`
`Subject to and without waiving these objections, Caterpillar responds as follows:
`
`Caterpillar incorporates by reference its Third Amended Initial Disclosures Pursuant to Fed. R.
`
`Civ. P. 26(a)(1), dated March 1, 2023, as if fully set forth herein. Caterpillar reserves the right to
`
`identify its trial witnesses on a witness list at the time provided for in Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and/or the Scheduling Order (D.I. 28) entered by the
`
`Court.
`
`Caterpillar further responds that its investigation and discovery are ongoing, and it reserves
`
`the right to amend, modify, or supplement this response as new information becomes available in
`
`accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and the
`
`Scheduling Order (D.I. 28) entered by the Court.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 29: For each Wirtgen America patent, explain the basis if any for
`Caterpillar’s contention that its infringement has not been willful and deliberate, and identify each
`person with knowledge of the foregoing and all documents, by Bates number, relating to the
`foregoing.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 29:
`
`Caterpillar incorporates all of its general objections and reservations of rights as if
`
`specifically set forth herein. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly
`
`burdensome as seeking information related to the requested materials regardless of relevance,
`
`volume, or time, and to the extent it seeks information that is not relevant to the claim or defense
`
`of any party and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory
`
`to the extent it seeks information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or
`
`work-product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or protection. Caterpillar further objects
`
`to the extent this Interrogatory seeks a legal conclusion. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 30557
`
`as premature to the extent it seeks information before Caterpillar is required to identify and provide
`
`such information in accordance with the Scheduling Order.
`
`Subject to and without waiving these objections, Caterpillar responds as follows:
`
`Willfulness requires deliberate or intentional infringement. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian
`
`Rivera Maynez Enters., Inc., 946 F.3d 1367, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2020). To establish willfulness, a
`
`patentee must show that the accused infringer had a specific intent to infringe at the time of the
`
`challenged conduct. BASF Plant Sci., LP v. Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Organisation,
`
`28 F.4th 1247, 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (citing Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., 989 F.3d 964,
`
`987 (Fed. Cir. 2021)). “Knowledge of the asserted patent and evidence of infringement is
`
`necessary, but not sufficient, for a finding of willfulness.” Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc.,
`
`989 F.3d 964, 988 (Fed. Cir. 2021). Willfulness “is generally measured against the knowledge of
`
`the actor at the time of the challenged conduct.” Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., 579 U.S.
`
`93, 105 (2016).
`
`Caterpillar served Interrogatory No. 4 on Wirtgen America seeking the factual bases for
`
`Wirtgen America’s “contention that Caterpillar has willfully infringed Wirtgen America’s
`
`Asserted Patents.” Wirtgen America’s response fails to show that Wirtgen America can meet its
`
`burden to show willfulness. Furthermore, Wirtgen America’s response is deficient for many
`
`reasons, including because it does not: (1) identify the timeframe(s) of the challenged conduct; (2)
`
`identify any specific patents or link any accused features to such patents; (3) explain how or why
`
`any features of any Wirtgen America machine are covered by any of Wirtgen America Asserted
`
`Patents; (4) provide any evidence of copying or reverse engineering; (5) analyze any specific
`
`implementation of the accused features in Caterpillar’s machines; (6) account for Caterpillar’s
`
`independent development of its machines, including Caterpillar’s legacy machines with the same
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 30558
`
`or similar features; and (7) account for prior art machines with the same or similar features. Given
`
`the deficiencies in Wirtgen America’s response it is not possible for Caterpillar to provide a
`
`complete response to this interrogatory at this time.
`
`Caterpillar was not aware of at least some of Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents until
`
`Wirtgen America commenced this litigation. Additionally, some of the patents had not even issued
`
`until after Wirtgen America commenced this litigation.
`
`Wirtgen’s references to Caterpillar’s purported teardowns of Wirtgen America’s machines
`
`do not support a finding of willfulness because Caterpillar did not copy or reverse engineer any
`
`patented implementation of a feature. Caterpillar engaged in teardowns both its own machines
`
`and Wirtgen America’s machines for competitive benchmarking and cost estimation purposes, not
`
`copying of reverse engineering. Caterpillar independently developed the features that Wirtgen
`
`America has accused of infringement and did not use the specific implementation of any feature
`
`found in Wirtgen America’s machines or Asserted Patents. In some instances, Caterpillar’s non-
`
`infringing implementation of an accused feature resulted in better performance than the
`
`comparable feature in Wirtgen America’s machines. See, e.g., Transcript of 2/28/23 Deposition
`
`of C. Steffen. Additionally, Caterpillar has received patents for at least some of the accused
`
`features that issued over Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents (US 9,797,100; US 9,303,761; US
`
`9,175,449; US 9,103,079; US 8,973,688; US 8,899,689; US 8,888,194; US 8,874,325; US
`
`8,757,729; US 11,460,052; US 11,453,985; US 11,453,984; US 11,255,059; US 11,225,761; US
`
`11,220,796; US 11,105,051; US 11,091,887; US 11,041,276; US 11,015,305; US 10,975,535; US
`
`10,876,260; US 10,844,557; US 10,776,638; US 10,662,590; US 10,584,450; US 10,563,362; US
`
`10,233,598; DE102021133144A1; DE102014001839A1).
`
`- 19 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 30559
`
`Wirtgen America’s reference to Voice of Customer surveys also does not support
`
`willfulness because Wirtgen fails to show that any customer valued the specific implementation
`
`of any feature purportedly covered by Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents, as opposed to a no-
`
`infringing and/or prior art implementation of the feature.
`
`Wirtgen America’s contentions regarding purported “patent search results documents” also
`
`does not support a finding of willfulness. See Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., 989 F.3d
`
`964, 988 (Fed. Cir. 2021). Moreover, Caterpillar has an Enterprise Policy regarding intellectual
`
`property rights that set forth in part:
`
`Caterpillar respects the valid and enforceable IP rights of others and expects that
`others will respect Caterpillar's IP rights. Business Units shall inform Legal
`Services-IP of planned introduction of new technology, products, services and
`processes. Legal Services-IP shall review such new technology, products, services,
`and process for IP protection and the risk of infringement of the IP rights of others
`and take appropriate actions to obtain protection and manage risk.
`
`CAT-770_042848.
`
`Caterpillar has at all times had a good faith belief that it did not infringe any valid claim of
`
`Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents. As explained above, for example, Caterpillar independently
`
`developed the accused features and did not copy them from Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents
`
`or machines. Once Wirtgen America commenced this litigation, Caterpillar asserted both non-
`
`infringement and invalidity defenses against Wirtgen America’s Asserted Patents and other
`
`patents, including in this case and in ITC investigation No. 1067. Caterpillar also redesigned
`
`several features that were at issue during the ITC proceedings. Caterpillar requested an obtained
`
`rulings from U.S. Customs and Border Patrol that the redesigned features did not infringe Wirtgen
`
`America’s patents. Moreover, Caterpillar challenged several of Wirtgen America’s Asserted
`
`Patents and other patents in IPR proceedings before the patent office. Each of those proceedings
`
`- 20 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 30560
`
`were instituted and many resulted in a final written decision invalidating Wirtgen America’s patent
`
`claims. E.g., IPR2017-02185, IPR2017-02188, IPR018-01091, IPR2017-02186, IPR2017-02187.
`
`Other IPRs have been instituted and remain pending. E.g., IPR2022-01278, IPR2022-01310,
`
`IPR2022-01264, IPR2022-01277. Furthermore, Caterpillar has asserted noninfringement and
`
`invalidity defenses in patent proceedings pending Italy. Caterpillar reserves the right to rely on all
`
`the foregoing proceedings, including the determinations and filing from such proceedings, to rebut
`
`Wirtgen America’s contention of willful infringement.
`
`Caterpillar and CTCT employees and former employees have knowledge regarding the
`
`foregoing, including Eric Engelmann, Nathan Just, Paul Koenen, Tim Lindholm, Tim Sturos, Jim
`
`Domanus, Dario Sansone, Mark Tarvin, Craig Steffen, Ben Schafer, and Daniel Killion.
`
`Caterpillar incorporates by reference its responses to Interrogatory Nos. 1, 19, and 20, as
`
`well as its Initial and Final Invalidity Contentions. Caterpillar may rely on the following
`
`documents and others to rebut willfulness:
`
`CAT_00001414
`
`CAT_00001463
`
`CAT_00001498
`
`CAT_00001598
`
`CAT_00001986
`
`CAT_00002111
`
`CAT_00003097
`
`CAT_00003319
`
`CAT_00003384
`
`CAT_00003791
`
`CAT_00005588
`
`CAT_00007022
`
`CAT_00008870
`
`CAT_00009134
`
`CAT_00009928
`
`CAT_00009931
`
`CAT_00010307
`
`CAT_00010309
`
`CAT_00010325
`
`CAT_00010655
`
`- 21 -
`
`CAT_00010867
`
`CAT_00011713
`
`CAT_00012504
`
`CAT_00013247
`
`CAT_00014250
`
`CAT_00014367
`
`CAT_00014568
`
`CAT_00015090
`
`CAT_00015725
`
`CAT_00015730
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 30561
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 8 of 13 PagelD #: 30561
`
`CAT_00015761
`CAT_00015761
`
`CAT_00018873
`CAT_00018873
`
`CAT_00019243
`CAT_00019243
`
`CAT_00027867
`CAT_00027867
`
`CAT_00027884
`CAT_00027884
`
`CAT_00029506
`CAT_00029506
`
`CAT_00029508
`CAT_00029508
`
`CAT_00029521
`CAT_00029521
`
`CAT_00030911
`CAT_00030911
`
`CAT_00033025
`CAT_00033025
`
`CAT_00033755
`CAT_00033755
`
`CAT_00033761
`CAT_00033761
`
`CAT_00034038
`CAT_00034038
`
`CAT_00034039
`CAT_00034039
`
`CAT_00034040
`CAT_00034040
`
`CAT_00034041
`CAT_00034041
`
`CAT_00034359
`CAT_00034359
`
`CAT_00034361
`CAT_00034361
`
`CAT_00034792
`CAT_00034792
`
`CAT_00034820
`CAT_00034820
`
`CAT_00034834
`CAT_00034834
`
`CAT_00036589
`CAT_00036589
`
`CAT_00037621
`CAT00037621
`
`CAT_00037623
`CAT_00037623
`
`CAT_00037669
`CAT_00037669
`
`CAT_00037683
`CAT_00037683
`
`CAT_00038129
`CAT00038129
`
`CAT_00038133
`CAT_00038133
`
`CAT_00038150
`CAT00038150
`
`CAT_00041187
`CAT00041187
`
`CAT_00041242
`CAT00041242
`
`CAT_00041243
`CAT00041243
`
`CAT_00041249
`CAT00041249
`
`CAT_00041251
`CAT00041251
`
`CAT_00041252
`CAT00041252
`
`CAT_00041253
`CAT00041253
`
`CAT_00041254
`CAT00041254
`
`CAT_00041258
`CAT00041258
`
`CAT_00042035
`CAT00042035
`
`CAT_00042482
`CAT00042482
`
`CAT_00042500
`CAT00042500
`
`CAT_00042501
`CAT00042501
`
`CAT_00042502
`CAT00042502
`
`CAT_00042511
`CAT00042511
`
`CAT_00042884
`CAT_00042884
`
`CAT_00042887
`CAT_00042887
`
`CAT_00042888
`CAT_00042888
`
`CAT_00042890
`CAT_00042890
`
`CAT_00042942
`CAT00042942
`
`CAT_00043083
`CAT_00043083
`
`CAT_00043193
`CAT_00043193
`
`CAT_00043982
`CAT_00043982
`
`CAT_00046708
`CAT_00046708
`
`CAT_00046710
`CAT_00046710
`
`CAT_00049606
`CAT_00049606
`
`CAT_00050984
`CAT_00050984
`
`CAT_00053633
`CAT_00053633
`
`CAT_00053635
`CAT_00053635
`
`CAT_00053761
`CAT_00053761
`
`CAT_00053762
`CAT_00053762
`
`CAT_00053778
`CAT_00053778
`
`CAT_00055744
`CAT_00055744
`
`CAT_00055745
`CAT_00055745
`
`CAT_00055787
`CAT_00055787
`
`CAT_00056220
`CAT_00056220
`
`CAT_00061506
`CAT_00061506
`
`CAT_00061567
`CAT_00042552
`CAT_00036614
`
`CAT_00036614 CAT00042552 CAT00061567
`
`
`- 22 -
`-22-
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 30562
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 9 of 13 PagelD #: 30562
`
`CAT_00062241
`CAT00062241
`
`CAT_00062258
`CAT00062258
`
`CAT_00087863
`CAT_00087863
`
`CAT_0072141
`CAT0072141
`
`CAT_0115253
`CAT0115253
`
`CAT00052947
`CAT00052947
`
`CAT00108364
`CAT00108364
`
`CAT0018787
`CAT0018787
`
`CAT0033112
`CAT0033112
`
`CAT0053069
`CAT0053069
`
`CAT0053480
`CAT0053480
`
`CAT0058600
`CAT0058600
`
`CAT0087933
`CAT0087933
`
`CAT0088667
`CAT0088667
`
`CAT0097759
`CAT0097759
`
`CAT0097763
`CAT0097763
`
`CAT0099138
`CAT0099138
`
`CAT0112052
`CATO0112052
`
`CAT0114017
`CATO0114017
`
`CAT0114079
`CATO0114079
`
`CAT0114722
`CATO0114722
`
`CAT0115298
`CATO0115298
`
`CAT0115700
`CAT0115700
`
`CAT-770_012849
`CAT-770_012849
`
`CAT-770_026523
`CAT-770_026523
`
`CAT-770_026557
`CAT-770_026557
`
`CAT-770_028257
`CAT-770_028257
`
`CAT-770_029403
`CAT-770_029403
`
`CAT-770_030634
`CAT-770_030634
`
`CAT-770_042848
`CAT-770_042848
`
`CAT-770_044693
`CAT-770_044693
`
`CAT-770_045303
`CAT-770_045303
`
`CAT-770_045555
`CAT-770_045555
`
`CAT-770_046551
`CAT-770_046551
`
`CAT-770_046619
`CAT-770_046619
`
`CAT-770_047034
`CAT-770_047034
`
`CAT-770_057149
`CAT-770_057149
`
`CAT-770_063217
`CAT-770_063217
`
`CAT-770_063219
`CAT-770_063219
`
`CAT-770_063220
`CAT-770_063220
`
`CAT-770_063227
`CAT-770_063227
`
`CAT-770_063792
`CAT-770_063792
`
`CAT-770_070258
`CAT-770_070258
`
`CTCT000543
`CTCT000543
`
`CTCT000648
`CTCT000648
`
`CAT0115827
`CAT0115827
`
`CAT0115864
`CAT0115864
`
`CAT0115865
`CAT0115865
`
`CAT0115869
`CAT0115869
`
`CAT0115956
`CAT0115956
`
`CAT0116678
`CAT0116678
`
`CAT0116864
`CAT0116864
`
`CAT0116944
`CAT0116944
`
`CAT0117155
`CAT0117155
`
`CAT0117240
`CAT0117240
`
`CAT0123583
`CAT0123583
`
`CAT0124812
`CAT0124812
`
`CAT0125478
`CAT0125478
`
`CAT0125953
`CAT0125953
`
`CAT0127253
`CAT0127253
`
`CAT0128313
`CAT0128313
`
`CAT0131852
`CAT0131852
`
`CAT0131864
`CAT0131864
`
`CAT-770_001209
`CAT-770_001209
`
`CAT-770_001323
`CAT-770_001323
`
`CAT-770_001325
`CAT-770_001325
`
`CAT-770_001526
`CAT-770_001526
`
`CAT-770_001547
`CAT-770_001547
`
`- 23 -
`-23-
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 30563
`
`Caterpillar further responds that its investigation and discovery are ongoing, and it reserves
`
`the right to amend, modify, or supplement this response as new information becomes available in
`
`accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and the
`
`Scheduling Order (D.I. 28) entered by the Court.
`
`INTERROGATORY NO. 30: Set forth and describe in detail the PM565 Cold Planer Machine
`that You have offered to Wirtgen America for inspection in Minerbio, Italy, including identifying
`the date and location where You manufactured the PM565 Cold Planer Machine, the serial number
`of the PM565 Cold Planer Machine, sales or leasing of the PM565 Cold Planer Machine, the
`features of the PM565 Cold Planer Machine, the functions of the PM565 Cold Planer Machine,
`and how the PM565 Cold Planer Machine relates to any claim or defense asserted in this Action,
`and identify all documents, by Bates number, relating to the foregoing.
`
`RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 30:
`
`Caterpillar incorporates all of its general objections and reservations of rights as if
`
`specifically set forth herein. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly
`
`burdensome as seeking information related to the requested materials regardless of relevance,
`
`volume, or time, and to the extent it seeks information that is not relevant to the claim or defense
`
`of any party and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory
`
`as vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome at least as to the term “functions” as used in this
`
`Interrogatory. Caterpillar also objects to this Interrogatory as compound, representing numerous
`
`requests in one. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected
`
`from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work-product doctrine, or any other
`
`applicable privilege or protection. Caterpillar objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks
`
`information that is publicly available or is as equally available to Wirtgen America as it is to
`
`Caterpillar.
`
`Subject to and without waiving these objections, Caterpillar responds that it has produced
`
`or will produce business records pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d) in response to
`
`this Interrogatory,
`
`including documents Bates numbered CAT-770_067086 and CAT-
`
`- 24 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 30564
`
`information that is publicly available or is as equally available to Wirtgen America as it is to
`
`Caterpillar.
`
`Subject to and without waiving these objections, Caterpillar responds that it will produce
`
`business records pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d) in response to this
`
`Interrogatory, in which responsive information may be found. Caterpillar further responds that the
`
`PM102 Cold Planer Machine offered for inspection in Minerbio, Italy is prior art related to
`
`Caterpillar’s invalidity defenses, is evidence of non-infringing alternatives, is evidence Caterpillar
`
`may rely on to rebut willfulness, and is evidence of a commercial embodiment of the ’995 patent.
`
`Caterpillar further responds that its investigation and discovery are ongoing, and it reserves
`
`the right to amend, modify, or supplement this response as new information becomes available in
`
`accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and the
`
`Scheduling Order (D.I. 28) entered by the Court.
`
`POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
`
`By: /s/ Andrew L. Brown
`Bindu A. Palapura (#5370)
`Andrew L. Brown (#6766)
`Hercules Plaza, 6th Floor
`1313 N. Market Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Tel: (302) 984-6000
`bpalapura@potteranderson.com
`abrown@potteranderson.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Caterpillar Inc.
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`James C. Yoon
`Christopher D. Mays
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`650 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Telephone: (650) 493-9300
`
`Ryan R. Smith
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
`Seattle, WA 98104
`Telephone: (206) 883-2500
`
`Lucy Yen
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, 40th Floor
`New York, NY 10019
`Telephone: (212) 999-5800
`
`- 26 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 30565
`
`Erik J. Carlson
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`633 West Fifth Street, Suite 1550
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Telephone: (323) 210-2900
`
`Dated: March 13, 2023
`10685038/11898.00005
`
`- 27 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 307-9 Filed 02/02/24 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 30566
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Andrew L. Brown, hereby certify that on March 13, 2023, true and correct copies of the
`
`within document were served on the following counsel of record at the addresses and in the
`
`Ryan D. Levy
`Seth R. Ogden
`William E. Sekyi
`Dominic A. Rota
`Mark A. Kilgore
`PATTERSON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
`LAW, P.C.
`1600 Division Street, Suite 500
`Nashville, TN 37203
`wirtgen1-litigation@iplawgroup.com
`
`manner indicated:
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`Adam W. Poff
`Pilar G. Kraman
`Samantha G. Wilson
`YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP
`Rodney Square
`1000 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`apoff@ycst.com
`pkraman@ycst.com
`swilson@ycst.com
`
`Daniel E. Yonan
`Paul A. Ainsworth
`R. Wilson Powers III
`Kyle E. Conklin
`Deirdre M. Wells
`Davin B. Guinn
`Joseph H. Kim
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX, PLLC
`1100 New York Ave., NW, Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005
`Wirtgendctlit@sternekessler.com
`
` /s/ Andrew L. Brown
`Andrew L. Brown
`
`