Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 3302
`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 1 of 15 PagelD #: 3302
`
`EXHIBIT D
`EXHIBIT D
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 2 of 15 PageID #: 3303
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`ORCA SECURITY LTD.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 23-758 (JLH)
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`WIZ, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`ORCA SECURITY LTD.’S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO WIZ, INC.’S
`SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF
`DOCUMENTS AND THINGS (NOS. 61-73)
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 34 and the District of
`
`Delaware’s Local Rule 26, Plaintiff Orca Security Ltd. (“Orca” or “Plaintiff”) objects and responds
`
`to Wiz, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “Wiz”) Second Set of Requests for Documents (“Request” or
`
`“Requests”) as set forth below.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`Orca’s General Objections to Wiz’s First Set of Requests for Production of
`
`Documents and Things (Nos. 1-60), served March 15, 2024, are incorporated herein by reference.
`
`Those general objections also are incorporated by reference into Orca’s responses to each and
`
`every Request addressed below.
`
`SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES
`
`REQUEST NO. 61:
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s use of and access to the
`Prisma Cloud platform (for marketing or competitive intelligence) or other materials which
`compare Orca to Prisma Cloud, including but not limited to all information which informed the
`development of the content at https://orca.security/resources/blog/prisma-cloud-security/ (last
`accessed June 11, 2024).
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 3 of 15 PageID #: 3304
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 61:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” and “all information,” and to the extent it seeks public information that is equally or
`
`more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for example as
`
`to the terms and phrases “use of and access to the Prisma Cloud platform” “for marketing” and
`
`“for … competitive intelligence,” and “all information which informed the development.” Orca
`
`further objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the existence of facts that do not exist
`
`and the occurrence of events that did not take place. Orca also objects to this Request because it
`
`seeks information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects
`
`to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege,
`
`work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents within its possession, custody, or control comparing the Orca Cloud Platform to the
`
`Prisma Cloud Platform, if any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent
`
`search.
`
`REQUEST NO. 62
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to any violation by Orca of Prisma
`Cloud’s end user licensing agreement, or to any contention by Orca that it has not violated this
`agreement.
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 4 of 15 PageID #: 3305
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 62:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” relating to “any” purported violation, and to the extent it seeks public information that
`
`is equally or more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this request as vague and ambiguous, for
`
`example as to the terms and phrases “violation” and “any contention by Orca that it has not violated
`
`this agreement.” Orca further objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the existence of
`
`facts that do not exist and the occurrence of events that did not take place, and to the extent that it
`
`asserts legal arguments or characterizations. Orca also objects to this Request because it seeks
`
`information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects to this
`
`Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-
`
`product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents within its possession, custody, or control relating to correspondence that Palo Alto
`
`Networks, Inc. sent to Orca in September 2020, which discussed use of the Prisma Cloud and
`
`Orca’s comparison and rating of the Prisma Cloud, and Orca’s response to same.
`
`REQUEST NO. 63
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s use of and access to the
`Qualys platform (for marketing or competitive intelligence) or other materials that compare Orca
`to Qualys, including but not limited to all information which informed the development of the
`content at https://orca.security/resources/blog/qualys-cloud-agent/ (last accessed June 11, 2024).
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 5 of 15 PageID #: 3306
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 63:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” and “all information,” and to the extent it seeks public information that is equally or
`
`more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for example as
`
`to the terms and phrases “use and access to the Qualys platform,” “for marketing” and “for …
`
`competitive intelligence,” and “all information which informed the development.” Orca further
`
`objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the existence of facts that do not exist and the
`
`occurrence of events that did not take place. Orca also objects to this Request because it seeks
`
`information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects to this
`
`Request to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product
`
`immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents within its possession, custody, or control comparing the Orca Cloud Platform to the
`
`Qualys Cloud Platform, if any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent
`
`search.
`
`REQUEST NO. 64
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to any violation by Orca of
`Qualys’s end user licensing agreement, or to any contention by Orca that it has not violated this
`agreement.
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 6 of 15 PageID #: 3307
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 64:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” relating to “any” purported “violation,” and to the extent it seeks public information
`
`that is equally or more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this request as vague and ambiguous,
`
`for example as to the terms and phrases “violation” and “any contention by Orca that it has not
`
`violated this agreement.” Orca further objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the
`
`existence of facts that do not exist and the occurrence of events that did not take place, and to the
`
`extent that it asserts legal arguments or characterizations. Orca also objects to this Request because
`
`it seeks information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects
`
`to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege,
`
`work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca states that, after a reasonably diligent search, Orca does not have in
`
`its possession, custody, or control documents and things responsive to this request.
`
`REQUEST NO. 65
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s use of and access to the
`Rapid7 platform (for marketing or competitive intelligence) or other materials which compare
`Orca to Rapid7, including but not limited to all information which informed the development of
`the content at https://orca.security/resources/blog/rapid7-insightvm/ (last accessed June 11, 2024).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 65:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 7 of 15 PageID #: 3308
`
`
`
`and Things” and “all information,” and to the extent it seeks public information that is equally or
`
`more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for example as
`
`to the terms and phrases “use of and access to the Rapid7 platform,” “for marketing” and “for …
`
`competitive intelligence,” and “all information which informed the development.” Orca further
`
`objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the existence of facts that do not exist and the
`
`occurrence of events that did not take place. Orca also objects to this Request because it seeks
`
`information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects to this
`
`Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-
`
`product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents within its possession, custody, or control comparing the Orca Cloud Platform to the
`
`Rapid7 Cloud Platform, if any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent
`
`search.
`
`REQUEST NO. 66
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to any violation by Orca of
`Rapid7’s end user licensing agreement, or to any contention by Orca that it has not violated this
`agreement.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 66:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” relating to “any” purported “violation,” and to the extent it seeks public information
`
`that is equally or more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this request as vague and ambiguous,
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 8 of 15 PageID #: 3309
`
`
`
`for example as to the terms and phrases “violation” and “any contention by Orca that it has not
`
`violated this agreement.” Orca further objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the
`
`existence of facts that do not exist and the occurrence of events that did not take place, and to the
`
`extent that it asserts legal arguments or characterizations. Orca also objects to this Request because
`
`it seeks information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects
`
`to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege,
`
`work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca states that, after a reasonably diligent search, Orca does not have in
`
`its possession, custody, or control documents and things responsive to this request.
`
`REQUEST NO. 67
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s dispute with Palo Alto
`Networks regarding review of other security platforms, including Relating to Orca’s use of and
`access to Palo Alto’s platform (for marketing or competitive intelligence) or other materials which
`compare Palo Alto to Orca, including but not limited to all information which informed the
`development
`of
`the
`Orca
`online
`videos
`referenced
`at
`https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/23/palo_alto_orca_lawsuit/ (last accessed June 11, 2024).
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 67:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to
`
`the needs of the case, including, for example, because it is unlimited in time, seeks “All Documents
`
`and Things” and “all information,” and to the extent it seeks public information that is equally or
`
`more available to Wiz. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for example as
`
`to the terms and phrases “use of and access to Palo Alto’s platform,” “for marketing” and “for …
`
`competitive intelligence,” and “all information which informed the development.” Orca further
`
`objects to this Request to the extent that it assumes the existence of facts that do not exist and the
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 9 of 15 PageID #: 3310
`
`
`
`occurrence of events that did not take place. Orca also objects to this Request because it seeks
`
`information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit. Orca further objects to this
`
`Request to the extent it seeks documents that are duplicative of documents Requested in Request
`
`Nos. 61 and 62. Orca also objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected
`
`by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, and as Orca stated in response to Wiz’s Requests Nos. 61 and 62, Orca
`
`will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged documents within its
`
`possession, custody, or control (i) comparing the Orca Cloud Platform to the Prisma Cloud
`
`Platform, if any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent search, and
`
`(ii) relating to correspondence that Palo Alto Networks, Inc. sent to Orca in September 2020,
`
`which discussed Orca’s comparison and rating of the Prisma Cloud, and Orca’s response to same.
`
`REQUEST NO. 68
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Avi Shua’s first inventive
`contribution and/or earliest act of inventorship for each of the Asserted Patents.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 68:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for example as to the terms “first
`
`inventive contribution” and “earliest act of inventorship.” Orca also objects to this Request to the
`
`extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity,
`
`and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 10 of 15 PageID #:
`3311
`
`
`
`documents within its possession, custody, or control relating to Mr. Shua’s inventive contributions
`
`and acts of inventorship for the Asserted Patents.
`
`REQUEST NO. 69
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Avi Shua’s dates of employment
`with Orca, including but not limited to any employment agreements between Avi Shua and Orca.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 69:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs
`
`of the case, including, for example, because it seeks “All Documents and Things showing or
`
`Relating to” Mr. Shua’s dates of employment.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents sufficient to show Mr. Shua’s dates of employment with Orca, as well as any
`
`employment agreements between Mr. Shua and Orca within its possession, custody, or control, if
`
`any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent search.
`
`REQUEST NO. 70
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Avi Shua’s dates of employment
`with Check Point Software Technologies, including but not limited to any employment agreements
`between Avi Shua and Check Point Software Technologies.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 70:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs
`
`of the case, including, for example, because it seeks “All Documents and Things showing or
`
`Relating to” Mr. Shua’s dates of employment.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 11 of 15 PageID #:
`3312
`
`
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents sufficient to show Mr. Shua’s dates of employment with Check Point, as well as any
`
`employment agreements between Mr. Shua and Check Point, within its possession, custody, or
`
`control, if any such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent search.
`
`REQUEST NO. 71
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to any assignment, license,
`contract, covenant, or any other agreement between Orca and Check Point Software
`Technologies.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 71:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case, and because it seeks irrelevant information, including, for example, because it
`
`is unlimited in time and seeks “All Documents and Things showing or Relating to” and “any
`
`assignment, license, contract, covenant, or any other agreement,” without regard to whether the
`
`subject matter it targets relates, in any way, to the parties’ claims or defenses. Orca also objects to
`
`this Request to the extent it seeks information which is confidential or proprietary to, or the trade
`
`secrets of, a non-party, and which Orca is under an obligation and duty to the non-party to not
`
`disclose, unless the non-party agrees to a suitable protective order or consents in writing to Orca
`
`to the disclosure.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca will produce non-cumulative, responsive, relevant, non-privileged
`
`documents relating to agreements between Orca and Check Point Software Technologies, if any
`
`such documents exist and can be located after a reasonably diligent search.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 12 of 15 PageID #:
`3313
`
`
`
`REQUEST NO. 72
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s competitive business
`intelligence activities, including but not limited to all communications with and documents
`Relating to CGI GROUP.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 72:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case, and because it seeks irrelevant information, including, for example, because it
`
`is unlimited in time and seeks “All Documents and Things” and “all” communications and
`
`documents, without regard to whether the subject matter it targets relates, in any way, to the parties
`
`or their claims and defenses. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for
`
`example as to the terms and phrases “competitive business intelligence activities” and “CGI
`
`GROUP.” Orca further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by
`
`the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca states that it will not produce documents requested by this Request
`
`at this time, but Orca is willing to meet and confer with Wiz regarding same, e.g., to discuss
`
`whether and how this Request may be reasonably narrowed and how, if at all, it relates to Wiz’s
`
`claims.
`
`REQUEST NO. 73
`
`All Documents and Things showing or Relating to Orca’s competitive business
`intelligence activities Relating to Wiz, including but not limited to all communications with and
`documents Relating to CGI GROUP.
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 13 of 15 PageID #:
`3314
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 73:
`
`Orca incorporates all of its General Objections as if specifically set forth herein.
`
`Orca further objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case, and because it seeks irrelevant information, including, for example, because it
`
`is unlimited in time and seeks “All Documents and Things” and “all” communications and
`
`documents, without regard to whether the subject matter it targets relates, in any way, to the
`
`parties’ claims and defenses. Orca also objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous, for
`
`example as to the terms and phrases “competitive business intelligence activities” and “CGI
`
`GROUP.” Orca further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by
`
`the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, and/or any other exception or privilege.
`
`Subject to, as limited by, and without waiving the foregoing General Objections
`
`and Specific Objections, Orca states that it will not produce documents requested by this Request
`
`at this time, but Orca is willing to meet and confer with Wiz regarding same, e.g., to discuss
`
`whether and how this Request may be reasonably narrowed and how, if at all, it relates to Wiz’s
`
`claims.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Douglas E. Lumish
`Lucas Lonergan
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`140 Scott Drive
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`(650) 328-4600
`
`
`MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT &TUNNELL LLP
`
`/s/ Rodger D. Smith II
`___________________________________
`Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
`Rodger D. Smith II (#3778)
`Cameron P. Clark (#6647)
`1201 North Market Street
`P.O. Box 1347
`Wilmington, DE 19899-1347
`(302) 658-9200
`jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com
`rsmith@morrisnichols.com
`cclark@morrisnichols.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Orca Security Ltd.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 14 of 15 PageID #:
`3315
`
`
`
`Blake R. Davis
`Peter Hoffman
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`(415) 391-0600
`
`Kristina D. McKenna
`Christopher Henry
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`200 Clarendon Street
`Boston, MA 02116
`(617) 948-6000
`
`Ryan Thomas Banks
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`650 Town Center Drive, 20th Floor
`Costa Mesa, CA 92626
`(714) 540-1235
`
`Nicole Elena Bruner
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`555 Eleventh Street, NW, Suite 1000
`Washington, DC 20004
`(202) 637-2200
`
`July 15, 2024
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 143-4 Filed 09/11/24 Page 15 of 15 PageID #:
`3316
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on July 15, 2024, copies of the foregoing were caused to be
`
`served upon the following in the manner indicated:
`
`Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Esquire
`Kelly E. Farnan, Esquire
`Christine D. Haynes, Esquire
`RICHARD, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A.
`One Rodney Square
`920 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`Jordan R. Jaffe, Esquire
`Catherine Lacey, Esquire
`Callie Davidson, Esquire
`Alex Miller, Esquire
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`One Market Plaza
`Spear Tower, Suite 3300
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`Praatika Prasad, Esquire
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, 40th Floor
`New York, NY 10019-6022
`(212) 999-5800
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`
`
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`
`/s/ Rodger D. Smith II
`_______________________________
`Rodger D. Smith II (#3778)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`