Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 1 of 52
`
`Exhibit 3
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 2 of 52
`
`z{|}~ÿ€‚ƒƒ€ÿÿÿÿÿÿ„…†‡ˆ}‰Š~ÿ€‚ƒÿÿÿÿÿ‹{Œ}~ÿƒÿÿÿÿÿŽ}~ÿƒ€‘€‘€’€€
`
`

ÿ



ÿ

ÿÿ ÿ
`ÿ

 ÿ  ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ ÿÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ !ÿ"##"$!ÿ$$%&ÿ
`ÿ
`()*+*+,-)./ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`#0ÿ12343450ÿ657ÿ8ÿ9743ÿ56ÿ:80;8<=>ÿ35ÿ3?2ÿÿ
`@0432;ÿA3832>ÿB4>374C3ÿ%5=73ÿ657ÿ3?2ÿ92>3270ÿB4>374C3ÿ56ÿD2E8>&ÿÿ
`%8>2ÿ5FÿGHIIJCKJLLLMNÿ
`O=;P2ÿQR80ÿBÿQRS74P?3ÿ
`ÿ
`TUTVWXYZW[\ÿ]YZWZWTÿVT^ÿ[ÿ_^WZÿTVÿ`[X[`abÿ
`ÿ
`""! ÿBFÿQB! Aÿÿ
`O# BQÿBFÿA!"Q$$ÿ
`:@"! &ÿD#$$!Aÿcÿ#$A#ÿ$$1ÿ
`OFÿlQÿBQmÿ
`:@"! &ÿD#$$!Aÿcÿ#$A#ÿ$$1ÿ
`MdLÿA5=3?ÿ"780;ÿQK20=2ÿ
`ÿ
`GLNÿ:8>>8C?=>233>ÿQK20=2ÿ9ÿ
`dL3?ÿeR557ÿ
`A=432ÿdLLÿ!ÿ
`$5>ÿQ0P2R2>&ÿ%QÿfLLgNÿ
`98>?40P350&ÿB%ÿILLLNÿ
`D2R2h?502HÿiINMjÿGkMJfNLLÿ
`D2R2h?502HÿiILIjÿIILJNNLLÿ
`ÿÿÿ
`ÿ!<84RHÿP40P27F80;27>n<35FC5<ÿ
`ÿ
`o57;80F>2P8RRn<35FC5<ÿ
`ÿ
`p840F;8qn<35FC5<ÿ
`r,s-t)uÿv,.ÿ()*+*+,-).ÿw,,xu)ÿyyrÿ
`B2C2<S27ÿII&ÿILII
`
`ÿ ÿ
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 3 of 52
`Caease:22DooPpomeantotuniesaae-2 FiledateiesGe2z? Page 3 of 52
`
`CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST
`
`Counsel for Google certifies the following:
`
`^_`abÿdefggdÿÿÿÿÿÿhijklamnbÿdfgÿÿÿÿÿo_pabÿdÿÿÿÿÿqrsatbÿgdudeudvdd
`  ÿ
`ÿ 

ÿÿ
` ÿÿÿ  ÿÿ ÿ
`ÿÿÿ !ÿÿ"#ÿ$ #ÿ$%ÿ&#ÿ!ÿ ÿ
`
`ÿ'' ÿ
`(ÿÿ !ÿÿÿ ÿ$  ÿ ÿ ÿ$%ÿ&#ÿ!ÿ ÿÿ
`)ÿÿ ÿÿ
`*ÿ+ÿ$ ÿ$  ÿ %ÿ #ÿ$& #ÿ%ÿ!$  ÿ ÿÿ
`,-ÿÿ!ÿÿ.ÿ ÿÿ$  ÿ$%ÿ&#ÿ!ÿ ÿ
`+$ &ÿ/0ÿ112/ÿ3% ÿ/ÿ
`4ÿÿ !ÿÿ ÿ ÿ !ÿ %ÿÿ$ ÿÿ  ÿ ÿ
` $$ %ÿÿÿ$  ÿÿ$%ÿ&#ÿ!ÿ&ÿÿ
`    ÿÿÿ ÿ ÿ5$%ÿÿ $$ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ6 %ÿ
`ÿ "ÿÿÿ ÿÿÿ ÿ $$  ÿ ÿ ÿ 7ÿ ÿ
`89:;ÿ<9=>?@A=ÿBB8ÿ+5ÿC !DÿE  ÿFÿG .DÿE " %ÿHÿI5Dÿ
`J K &ÿ'ÿG Dÿ #ÿLÿ DÿFÿ+ÿ    Dÿ
`F ÿM DÿC&ÿCÿ' K DÿC&ÿNÿO .ÿ
`

PQ>>RÿS9T?=ÿUÿVPQ@@?PQRÿBB8ÿW ÿ+ÿ+!Kÿ
`Xÿÿ ÿ %ÿ!&ÿÿ #ÿ ÿ.ÿÿÿÿ&ÿ$% ÿ
` ÿ ÿÿ #ÿÿÿÿ #ÿ ÿ ÿ% #ÿ ÿÿ&ÿ
`% #ÿ %ÿ&#ÿ ÿ Yÿ%  ÿ ÿÿ$% ÿ $$ ÿ ÿÿ
`)ÿ
`Zÿ[  K   ÿ2  !ÿ %ÿG .$#ÿ ÿÿI%ÿCÿ+$$ÿWÿ
`(Z6&7ÿ6  K   ÿ"  !ÿ ÿ !  ÿ 7ÿ %ÿ(Z67ÿ
`6& .$#ÿ ÿ%&ÿ %ÿ7ÿ ÿÿ $$  &ÿ& ÿ
` ÿ ÿÿ ÿ !  ÿÿ& .$#ÿ ÿÿLÿI%ÿ ÿCÿ
`4\46 76Z7ÿ
`)]+ÿ
` ÿ
`
`Organizational Victims and Bankruptcy Cases: Fed. R. App.P.
`26.1(b) (organizational victims in criminal cases) and 26.1(c)
`(bankruptcy case debtors and trustees) are not applicable because
`this is not a criminal or bankruptcy case. See Fed. Cir. R.
`47.4(a)(6).
`
`The full name of every party represented by meis:
`
`Google LLC
`
`The namesof the real parties in interest represented by meare:
`
`Noneother than Google.
`
`All parent corporations and any publicly held companies that own
`10% or more of stock in the parties represented by meare:
`
`Alphabet Inc.; XXVI HoldingsInc.
`
`The namesofall law firms and the partnersor associates that
`appearedfor the parties now represented by me before the
`originating court or that are expected to appear in this court (and
`who havenotor will not enter an appearancein this case) are:
`
`Paul Hastings LLP: Alex Rhim, Daniel J. Blake, David M. Fox,
`Elizabeth L. Brann, Grayson S. Cornwell, John A. Cotiguala,
`Joshua Yin, Robert R. Laurenzi, Robert W. Unikel
`
`Scott, Davis & McConnico, LLP: Paige Arnette Amstutz
`
`The title and numberof any case knownto counsel to be pending
`in this or any other court or agency that will directly affect or be
`directly affected by this Court’s decision in the pending appealis:
`
`None.
`
`N/A
`
`ÿ ÿ
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`

`

`DATED: December 22, 2022
`
`$%&'(ÿ*+,--*ÿÿÿÿÿÿ./012'34(ÿ*,-ÿÿÿÿÿ5%6'(ÿ+ÿÿÿÿÿ789':(ÿ-*;*+;*<**
` ÿÿ
`ÿ

ÿ



ÿ
`ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
`ÿ
` !ÿ"ÿ #ÿÿ
`ÿ
`
`Ginger D. Anders
`
`ii
`
` ÿ
`
`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 4 of 52
`Caease:22DooPpomeantotunieaaae.2 FiledateiasQe2z? Page 4 of 52
`
`By:
`
`_/s/ Ginger D. Anders
`
`ÿ ÿ
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 5 of 52
`Caease:22DooPpomantotunieaaag-2 FiledateiesQe2? Page 5 of 52
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`LMNOPÿRSTUURÿÿÿÿÿÿVWXYZO[\PÿRTUÿÿÿÿÿ]M^OPÿ_ÿÿÿÿÿ`abOcPÿURdRSdReRR
`  ÿÿ 
`ÿ
`

ÿ
`ÿÿÿÿ
` !" ÿÿÿ
`ÿ# !ÿÿ$ÿ
`%& ÿÿ%"ÿÿ$ÿ
`ÿ'()ÿ*+,ÿ--.'+ÿ/ÿ0!12ÿ!+,)34+ÿ45+ÿ674ÿ4564ÿ !"%ÿ,ÿ
`"'+68'(ÿ45+ÿ*349,ÿ"+/4+8ÿ-:ÿ86;34(ÿÿ$ÿ
`%ÿ5+ÿ#6843+,ÿÿ$ÿ
`<ÿ5+ÿ%,,+84+=ÿ#64+/4,ÿÿ>ÿ
`"ÿ5+ÿ%77*,+=ÿ#8-=*74ÿÿ?ÿ
`ÿ5+ÿ!3,48374ÿ"-*84ÿ!+/3+,ÿ--.'+9,ÿ86/,:+8ÿ&-43-/ÿÿ@ÿ
`% ÿ0Aÿÿ0ÿ!ÿÿÿÿ
`ÿ5+ÿ#83;64+ÿ/4+8+,4ÿ674-8,ÿ5-Bÿ4564ÿ !"%ÿ,ÿ"'+68'(ÿ
`&-8+ÿ"-/;+/3+/4ÿÿCÿ
`%ÿ !"%ÿ3,ÿ"'+68'(ÿ&-8+ÿ"-/;+/3+/4ÿ:-8ÿ45+ÿ03''3/.ÿ
`034/+,,+,ÿÿCÿ
`<ÿ&6/(ÿ&-8+ÿ+'+;6/4ÿ538=D#684(ÿ034/+,,+,ÿ%8+ÿ
`*EF+74ÿ4-ÿ"-G)*',-8(ÿ#8-7+,,ÿ3/ÿ !"%ÿ456/ÿ3/ÿ
`0!1ÿÿH@ÿ
`"ÿ5+ÿ-*87+,ÿ-:ÿ#8--:ÿ%8+ÿ&-8+ÿ%77+,,3E'+ÿ3/ÿ !"%ÿÿHIÿ
`!ÿ5+ÿJ#8674376'ÿ#8-E'+G,Kÿ674-8ÿ,ÿ +*486'ÿÿC@ÿ
`ÿ5+ÿ#*E'37ÿ/4+8+,4ÿ674-8,ÿ5-Bÿ4564ÿ !"%ÿ,ÿ"'+68'(ÿ
`&-8+ÿ"-/;+/3+/4ÿÿCHÿ
`%ÿ !"%ÿ6,ÿ6ÿ48-/.ÿ-76'ÿ/4+8+,4ÿ3/ÿ5+,+ÿ%743-/,2ÿ
`053'+ÿ0!1ÿ6,ÿ344'+ÿ-76'ÿ/4+8+,4ÿCHÿ
`<ÿ5+ÿ"-*84D"-/.+,43-/ÿ674-8ÿ,ÿ +*486'2ÿ6/=ÿ"6//-4ÿ
`0+3.5ÿ%.63/,4ÿ86/,:+8ÿÿC>ÿ
`ÿÿÿ
`ÿ
`
`B. Many More Relevant Third-Party Witnesses Are
`Subject to Compulsory Process in NDCAthan in
`WDTX o.oo... ceccessssscceceecssseeececceessseeeesecceeesseeeeseesesesssneeeeeeeeesseees 20
`
`RELIEF SOUGHT..............ccccccccssssssssecceecsessssseececcseessnseeceeceeessnsseeeeesseessnseees 1
`
`INTRODUCTION............ccccccccccsssssssecceecssssecseecescssseeseecesessseaeseceeeessseaeeeess 1
`
`ISSUE PRESENTED .............cccccsssssecceesssssecsceceeessseeseeceeessseaaeseceeeessseaeeeess 4
`
`STATEMENTOF FACTS...........c:ccccccccsssssseeceecessssseeeeecceessseeeeeeseseesseaeeeecs 4
`
`I,
`
`Flyp Sues Google In WDTX,Despite the Fact that NDCA Is
`Clearly the Suit’s Center of Gravity ..............ccccccccececeeccececceceeeeseneaees 4
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`The Parties ...........cccccsccscccccecceceeseeceessessessnssneanscseecsececeeseeseeseeeees 4
`
`The Asserted Patents. .............ccc:sssssssscscccccecceceeseeesessessessesssanes 6
`
`The Accused Product..........ccccccccccsccccceccessesssessssssssssnnseeseceeeeees 8
`
`Il.
`
`The District Court Denies Google’s Transfer Motion.................... 10
`
`REASONS WHY THE WRIT SHOULDISSUE.............ccccecccccceeeeeseeees 11
`
`I,
`
`The Private Interest Factors Show that NDCAIs Clearly
`More Convenient ............cccccecseseseesesessssnscnneansneseceeceeceeeeeseeseeesesesseeaes 13
`
`A.
`
`NDCAis Clearly More Convenientfor the Willing
`WiItNeSSES...........::csesessssessssesecececceccececceceeeceaeaugaaasssessseesesececeeees 13
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`The Sources of Proof Are More Accessible in NDCA............. 25
`
`The “Practical Problems” Factor Is Neutral.....................00+ 30
`
`II.
`
`The Public Interest Factors Show that NDCAIs Clearly
`More Convenient ............ccccceccesesessessssssnssensanseeseceeceeceseesseeseeseesssseeaes 32
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`NDCA Has a Strong Local Interest in These Actions,
`While WDTX HasLittle Local Interest....................cccceeeeeeees 32
`
`The Court-Congestion Factor Is Neutral, and Cannot
`Weigh Against Transfer...........ccccccccccccsssssssssssssssseseseeseceeeeenees 36
`
`lil
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 6 of 52
`Caease:22DooPpomeantotunieaaae2 HiledateissQe2z? Page 6 of 52
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Continued)
`
`Page
`
`III. Taken Together, The Venue-Convenience Factors Require
`Transfer to NDCA...........cccccsssssssssssssseseeeeeececcececceceecesceseneceaeasssssesens 38
`
`LMNOPÿRSTUURÿÿÿÿÿÿVWXYZO[\PÿRTUÿÿÿÿÿ]M^OPÿ_ÿÿÿÿÿ`abOcPÿURdRSdReRR
`  ÿÿ 
`ÿ
`

 ÿ
`ÿ
` ÿ!"#$%&ÿ$ÿ' ()*!   +ÿ,+#!%-ÿ./(%
`% -0%ÿ#!ÿ12*3ÿÿ45ÿ
`*71*89:71ÿÿ4;ÿ
` <= < ÿ< >? < ÿ?<=ÿ
`$ÿ@#%Aÿ!@##Bÿ0%!@ÿC##! ÿC"-ÿD&ÿ;&ÿEF)EG&ÿH4&ÿHF&ÿH5&ÿ
` Bÿ4Fÿ+! # -ÿ+! 0B #Aÿ 0!%@#! ÿ0ABÿ( B%ÿ-AÿI#$ÿ#$ÿ
`B-#%+#ÿ+!(%#ÿ ÿ++!%B +ÿI#$ÿÿC%!#+#ÿ!%B%ÿÿ$#ÿ 0!%@#! ÿ
` +A(B-ÿC%-! AAJÿB #0J "ÿ 0!%@#! ÿ Bÿ$"$AJ)+! 0B #Aÿ
`K(- --ÿ 0!%@#! &ÿ +A(B "ÿ#$ÿA!+#! ÿ Bÿ (@K%ÿ!0ÿ
`@CA!J-ÿ Bÿ#$ÿ#+$ +Aÿ!C%#! ÿ!0ÿC%!B(+#-
`ÿ
`
`CONCLUSION...........cccccscccceessssssesceceeessseesceccesssseeeseceesesssaeececeeessseaseeess 39
`
`CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OMITTED
`
`The material omitted from petition pages 5, 9, 14-16, 23, 24, 28,
`
`and 34 contains confidential
`
`information filed under seal with the
`
`district court in accordance with a protective order. That information
`
`includes personally identifying information and_highly-confidential
`
`business
`
`information,
`
`including
`
`the
`
`location
`
`and
`
`number
`
`of
`
`employees and the technical operation of products.
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 7 of 52
`
`efghiÿklmnnkÿÿÿÿÿÿopqrshtuiÿkmnÿÿÿÿÿvfwhiÿxÿÿÿÿÿyz{h|iÿnk}kl}k~kk
`  ÿÿ  
`

ÿ
` ÿ
`
` ÿ



ÿ
`ÿÿÿ ÿ!"# $ÿ
`&'&ÿ()*+ÿ,'-'ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ'3,34ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ'-ÿ
`ÿÿ5"6ÿ $ÿ
`7'*ÿ()ÿ899:;ÿ<'<ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ'3'34ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ*=$ÿ*7ÿ
`ÿÿ##>ÿ $ÿ
`<=<ÿ()*+ÿ,**'ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ'3'34ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ,'$ÿ*?ÿ
`ÿÿ##>ÿ $ÿ
`@A)ÿ',B,7,$ÿ'3',ÿCDÿ-'<,73?ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ@AE)ÿ,-$ÿ'3',4ÿ)))))))))ÿ*$ÿ,-$ÿ*&ÿ
`ÿÿ##>ÿ $ÿ
`@A)ÿ''B,'7$ÿ'3''ÿCDÿ,,<&=&7ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ892)ÿ''$ÿ'3''4ÿ))))))))))))ÿ#FGGHÿ
`ÿÿ##>ÿ $ÿ
`@A)ÿ''B,*=$ÿ'3''ÿCDÿ,&=&?33ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿIJKÿ'&$ÿ'3''4ÿ)))))))))ÿ*$ÿ**$ÿ*?ÿ
`ÿÿ##>Lÿ $ÿ
`-7,ÿ()ÿ899:;ÿ77&ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ'3,?4ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ'3$ÿ'?ÿ
`!MNÿO ÿP Q ÿRHGS ÿ!"TSÿU"ÿR ! $ÿ
`-?'ÿV)W)ÿ*&=ÿ.'33?4ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ,'ÿ
`ÿÿRQXÿYSZ"[ÿ\\!$ÿ
`@A)ÿ',B,7'$ÿ'3',ÿCDÿ?<,,<7,ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ]^_)ÿ',$ÿ'3',4ÿ))))))))))))))ÿ''$ÿ*&ÿ
`ÿÿ`5abÿ!"# ÿQOG Lÿ $ÿ
`@A)ÿ''B,-&$ÿ'3''ÿCDÿ,377===3ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ]^_)ÿ,<$ÿ'3''4ÿ))))))))))))))))))ÿ,-ÿ
`ÿÿcSM$ÿ
`-&&ÿ()*+ÿ,*77ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿ'33<4ÿ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))ÿ,?$ÿ'3$ÿ'-ÿ
`ÿÿc""d>ÿ\\!$ÿ
`@A)ÿ',B,=3$ÿ'3',ÿCDÿ??'=7<<ÿ.(/+)ÿ012)ÿW/9_)ÿ'=$ÿ'3',4ÿ))))))))ÿ*$ÿ''$ÿ*<ÿ
`ÿ
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 8 of 52
`
`nopqrÿtuvwwtÿÿÿÿÿÿxyz{|q}~rÿtvwÿÿÿÿÿo€qrÿÿÿÿÿÿ‚ƒ„q…rÿwt†tu†t‡tt
`  ÿÿ  
`

ÿ
` ÿ
` ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿ#$$%&"ÿ''()ÿ
`*+,ÿ-./.0.)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿ456--71ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ>?@,ÿA)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,ÿ-6)ÿC4)ÿC5ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿ#$$%&"ÿ''()ÿ
`*+,ÿ-./.07)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿ5-6--A0ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ*+,ÿ.5)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿ-5ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿ#$$%&"ÿ''()ÿ
`*+,ÿ--/.41)ÿ-1--ÿ23ÿ.A.C.6-ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿDEFÿ-C)ÿ-1--Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿC.ÿ
`ÿ!"ÿG$HHIJK'JÿL$MN"ÿMO)ÿ
`
`570ÿ9,C;ÿ.CCCÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ-116Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿC1)ÿC-)ÿCC)ÿC5ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿGP&PQÿ''()ÿ
`*+,ÿ-./.4-)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿC-07.64ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿRST,ÿ-)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,ÿ--)ÿ-4)ÿC7ÿ
`ÿ!"ÿUPVW"!ÿX"YZ$![\QÿMO)ÿ
`
`.4ÿ9,4@]ÿ.C.Cÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿWJ\\VIÿ
`ÿ!"ÿUPVW"!ÿX"YZ$![\QÿMO)ÿ
`
`*+,ÿ-./.5A)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿ45.6776ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ>?@,ÿ4)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿ-)ÿ.0ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿX"YH&V^QÿMO)ÿ
`*+,ÿ--/..1)ÿ-1--ÿ23ÿ.A0401ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ_E`,ÿ.6)ÿ-1--Bÿ,,,,ÿ.4)ÿ.A)ÿ.6)ÿC1ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿX"YaM$PYÿab\OQÿMO)ÿ
`*+,ÿ-./.0C)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿ400.05Aÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ>?@,ÿ.C)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿC-ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿcJd$!Jÿe"dVJQÿ''()ÿ
`*+,ÿ-./.0-)ÿ-1-.ÿ23ÿ400-715ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ>?@,ÿ.C)ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿC6ÿ
`aO(OÿU$N\$ÿfÿa$QÿMOÿgOÿ#V&&"YY"ÿ($IWJb)
`50.ÿ9,ÿhSii,ÿ..75ÿ8*,j,ÿkll,ÿ.67CBÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿ-Aÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿaJI\P%ÿm&"MY!$VM\ÿ($O)ÿ
`-ÿ9,4@]ÿ.C0.ÿ89:;,ÿ<=,ÿ-1-.Bÿ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ÿ.C)ÿC0)ÿC7)ÿC6ÿ
`ÿ
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 9 of 52
`
`uvwxyÿ{|}~~{ÿÿÿÿÿÿ€‚ƒx„…yÿ{}~ÿÿÿÿÿ†v‡xyÿˆÿÿÿÿÿ‰Š‹xŒyÿ~{{|{Ž{{
`  ÿÿ  
`

ÿ
` ÿ
` ÿ
`
`ÿ!"ÿ#$%ÿ#"&'()*ÿ&)+ÿ
`,-.ÿ/0ÿ12234ÿ5667ÿ8/9:0ÿ;<0ÿ=65.>ÿ000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ5?ÿ
`ÿ!"ÿ#$@$A%ÿB$A$!ÿC$!D)+ÿ
`
`E-Eÿ/0.:ÿ5..Fÿ8/9:0ÿ;<0ÿ=65->ÿ000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ=Eÿ
`ÿ!"ÿ#Gÿ#"&'ÿHGIÿC$!D)+ÿ
`
`,,5ÿ/0.:ÿ5.5,ÿ8/9:0ÿ;<0ÿ=66F>ÿ000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ55ÿ
`ÿ!"ÿJK(A%D!KAÿLAM)+ÿ
`
`7=Fÿ/0.:ÿ5.-=ÿ8/9:0ÿ;<0ÿ=656>ÿ000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ.5ÿ
`ÿ!"ÿJ$NO(P%Q"ÿ$RÿIS)*ÿ&)+ÿ
`
`,-,ÿ/0.:ÿ.6-ÿ8,TUÿ;<0ÿ=66F>ÿ0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ5=+ÿ5.+ÿ=?ÿ
`V
` ÿ



ÿ
`=FÿW0X0;0ÿYÿ5-6-8Z>ÿ00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ÿ56+ÿ5=ÿ
`V[ÿ\ 
`

ÿ
`;]Z^ÿ;_`aT<bcT_`ÿd<:9<ÿ8e;/ÿf_0ÿE.>+ÿgN@D(K*ÿ&)ÿh)ÿiK%ND%M*ÿ&)+ÿ
`f_0ÿ7j=5kck667-=k1l1ÿ8m0l0ÿn940ÿ1bo0ÿ==+ÿ=6==>ÿ0000000000000000000000000000ÿ.5ÿ
`;_^2]Z`Tÿ8e;/ÿf_0ÿ5>+ÿgN@D(K*ÿ&)ÿh)ÿiK%ND%M*ÿ&)+ÿ
`f_0ÿ7j=5kck667-=k1l1ÿ8m0l0ÿn940ÿpb`9ÿ=5+ÿ=6=5>ÿ0000000000000000000000000000ÿ.5ÿ
`p_`Tÿq_T_`ÿT_ÿla^aaÿ8e;/ÿf_0ÿE->+ÿgN@D(K*ÿ&)ÿh)ÿiK%ND%M*ÿ&)+ÿ
`f_0ÿ7j=5kck667-=k1l1ÿ8m0l0ÿn940ÿ1bo0ÿ=.+ÿ=6==>ÿ0000000000000000000000000000ÿ.5ÿ
` 
`ÿ  
`

ÿ
`W0X0ÿlaT<cTÿ;_b<Taÿkÿ/9:9<Z]ÿ;_b<TÿqZ`Zo9^9`TÿXTZTaTcaÿ
`8l9c0ÿ.5+ÿ=6=5>+ÿUTT2ajrrsss0bac_b<Ta0o_rt]9r-5=?6r:_s`]_Z:ÿ00000000ÿ.Fÿ
`ÿ
`
`

`

`Google respectfully requests that this Court
`
`issue a writ of
`
`mandamusto the United States District Court for the Western District
`
`of Texas (WDTX) vacating the district court’s order denying Google’s
`
`motion to transfer and directingthedistrict court to transfer this case to
`
`the Northern District of California (NDCA).
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The district court denied Google’s motion to transfer this case to
`
`NDCA on grounds that squarely contravene this Court’s decisions.
`
`NDCAhasa strong connection to and interest in this litigation, while
`
`WDTX hasvirtually no connection beyondtheplaintiffs decision to bring
`
`suit there. Plaintiff Flypsi, Inc., (“Flyp”) is a Delaware company with an
`
`WDTX. Yet Flyp brought this suit in WDTX, accusing the Google Voice
`
`product of infringing certain patents. Google Voice was primarily
`
`developed at Google’s NDCA headquarters by Google employees. NDCA
`
`thus is more convenient for the overwhelming majority of willing
`
`witnesses with relevant information, while the few Google employees in
`
`WDTX have knowledge that is at best duplicative of that of Google’s
`
`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 10 of 52
`CaSe@e222Vigo0Posumenbecumbagsns2 Filed) 4/28j2022 Page 10 of 52
`
`RELIEF SOUGHT
`
`@ABCDÿFGHIIFÿÿÿÿÿÿJKLMNCOPDÿFHIÿÿÿÿÿQARCDÿSÿÿÿÿÿTUVCWDÿIFXFGXFYFF
`  ÿ
`

ÿ
`ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿÿ
`!"#!ÿÿÿ$"#ÿ%ÿ&ÿÿÿÿ'"ÿ&ÿ
`ÿ()ÿ*'&(+,ÿ-"ÿÿ#ÿ.ÿ#ÿ#""ÿ.ÿ
`!"ÿÿ"ÿ"#ÿ#"ÿÿ#ÿÿÿ"ÿÿÿÿ
`ÿ/"ÿ&ÿÿ"ÿ*/&0,1ÿ
`2  3
`4  2ÿ
`(ÿ#ÿÿ#"#ÿ.ÿ!"ÿÿ"ÿÿÿÿ
`/&0ÿ"ÿ"#ÿÿÿ"-"ÿÿ.ÿ#"1ÿ
`/&0ÿÿÿ"ÿ"""ÿÿ"#ÿ"ÿ"ÿÿ"5ÿ ÿ
`'&(+ÿÿ-ÿ"ÿ"""ÿ6"#ÿÿ".ÿ#"ÿÿ6"ÿ
`ÿ1ÿÿ7"ÿ85ÿ9"15ÿ*:8;,ÿÿÿ& ÿ!"ÿ ÿ"ÿ
`ÿ"ÿÿ/"ÿ&ÿÿ()ÿ*/&(+,ÿ"#ÿ"ÿ"ÿ"ÿ
`'&(+1ÿÿ<ÿ8ÿ6ÿÿÿ"ÿ'&(+5ÿ"ÿÿÿ=ÿ
`#ÿÿ"""ÿ"ÿ"1ÿÿÿ=ÿ ÿ!ÿ
`#-#ÿÿ.ÿ/&0ÿ#ÿ6ÿÿ!1ÿÿ/&0ÿ
`ÿÿ!ÿ"-""ÿÿÿ- !"ÿ!>ÿÿ "ÿ
` "ÿ ÿ-"ÿ"!"5ÿ ÿÿ ÿÿ!ÿ"ÿ
`
`'&(+ÿ-ÿ?" #ÿÿÿÿ6ÿ#-ÿÿÿÿ.ÿ
`ÿ
`
`office in the Northern District of Texas (NDTX) and no presence in
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 11 of 52
`Cagase:-22-NDooPommeantotuntesaed Filed:2/28/2022 Page 11 of 52
`
`many NDCA employees. NDCA can compel the attendance of the large
`
`majority of third-party witnesses, as 16 prior-art witnesses and a
`
`prosecution attorney with knowledge critical to Google’s inequitable-
`
`conduct defense are in NDCA, while only three individuals whose
`
`relevance is unclear reside in WDTX. And NDCAhasa stronglocal
`
`interest in the suit, while WDTX has none.
`
`bcdefÿhijkkhÿÿÿÿÿÿlmnopeqrfÿhjkÿÿÿÿÿsctefÿkuÿÿÿÿÿvwxeyfÿkhzhizhuhh
` ÿ ÿ
`


`
`ÿÿ ÿ ÿ 
`

ÿ
`ÿ 
` 
`ÿ ÿ
`ÿ


`ÿ
`  ÿ ÿ ÿ
`
`ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ
`
`ÿ ÿ ÿ
` 
` ÿ  
`ÿÿ 

`
`ÿ

ÿ ÿ 

`!ÿ
`" #

`
` ÿ
`
`
`ÿ 
`ÿÿ ÿ

`ÿ 

ÿ
`
`ÿ$

ÿ 
`ÿ
`
`

`$ 
`ÿÿ

` ÿ
`
`ÿÿ%&'ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ



ÿ
`
`
`ÿÿ
`ÿÿ

`ÿ%&'ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ
`(ÿ 
`
`

`ÿ
`ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ
`ÿ 
`ÿ
`ÿÿ ÿ
`
` 
`ÿÿ !ÿ 
`ÿ
` ÿ ÿ 
`

ÿ
`
`ÿ
`$
`ÿ
`
`ÿ ÿ
` ÿ 
` ÿ ÿ&
`) ÿ  ÿ 
`* ÿ
`ÿ ÿ
` ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ $ 
`ÿ
`

$
`ÿ 
`ÿ ÿ+

ÿ
`

ÿ ÿ ÿÿ%ÿ
`
`
`ÿ ÿ
` 

ÿ
`$
`ÿ $
`
`
`ÿ  ÿ
`ÿÿ ÿ 
`ÿ

` ÿ
`  ÿ
`
`
`,ÿÿ
`-./00/12ÿ4/51677678ÿÿ

 ÿ)ÿ
`ÿ
`
`ÿ 
`ÿ

 
`ÿÿ 
`  ÿ ÿ

`ÿ 

ÿ ÿ$

ÿÿ"
`  #


`
`

`$ ÿ 

`
`ÿ 
`ÿÿ ÿ
` ÿ%&'ÿ
`ÿÿ ÿ 
`ÿ  ÿ
`

ÿ#ÿ 
`

ÿ
`ÿ+

!ÿ
`


`
`ÿ
`&'ÿ9 ÿ%&':ÿ  ÿ 
`*
`$
`ÿ ÿ
`
`ÿ
` 
`
`

ÿ;<ÿ
`$
`
`ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ
`


`
`ÿ 
`ÿ ÿ=
`
` 

`
`ÿ>ÿ ÿ 

ÿ#
`ÿ
`
`
`ÿÿÿ 
`?ÿÿ )@@Aÿÿ&
`
` ÿÿ #  
`ÿÿ #

  ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ=
`ÿ
`

`$ 
`ÿ 
` 
`

ÿ ?ÿ
`ÿ
`
`!ÿ 

`
`ÿ#
` 
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`  ÿ 
`ÿÿB;ÿDEÿFG;HIEDÿJEKL<DMNOÿB;Pÿ ÿQÿ@ÿ%R
`SQTUUTÿ ÿVAÿ9+
`ÿÿWÿSÿ@:
`-XYZ[\07Y]^ÿ[]Y_6778ÿÿ
`
`ÿ
`ÿ
`
`
`ÿ ÿ`aÿ 
`
`


`
`

`$ ÿ ÿ
`
`ÿÿ ÿ
`ÿÿ ÿ $
`
`ÿ
`
`e Willing witnesses. Although six key witnesses are located in or
`around NDCA, while only two individuals with questionably
`relevant knowledge are in or near WDTX,the district court found
`this factor neutral by improperly weighing Flyp’s employees in
`NDTX (not WDTX) against
`transfer—even though there is
`concededly no evidence that those employees possess any “specific
`knowledge ... that would be needed in this case.” Appx0013. The
`court thus abandonedits obligation to assess “the relevance and
`materiality of’? the witnesses’ knowledge before weighing them
`against transfer. In re Juniper Networks, Inc., No. 21-156, 2021 WL
`4519889, at *3 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 4, 2021).
`
`In nonetheless refusing to transfer the cases, the district court
`
`disregardedthis Court’s transfer decisions and consistently weighed even
`
`the most tenuous connections to Texas against transfer—at times going
`
`so far as to advance speculative arguments that Flyp itself had not. With
`
`respect to nearly every conveniencefactor, the district court ignored clear
`
`contrary precedent:
`
`e Compulsory process. Despite the presence of 17 concededly
`relevant third-party witnesses in NDCA,the district court gave
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 12 of 52
`
`lmnopÿrstuurÿÿÿÿÿÿvwxyzo{|pÿrtuÿÿÿÿÿ}m~opÿuuÿÿÿÿÿ€o‚pÿurƒrsƒr„rr
` ÿ 
` 

ÿ
`

ÿ

ÿ 

ÿ

 ÿ ÿ  ÿ
`ÿÿ
`

ÿÿ ÿ

ÿ  ÿÿ

 ÿÿ  

ÿ   ÿÿ ÿ
` 

ÿ

 ÿ
` ÿ


`ÿ  

!ÿ   

ÿ
`ÿ



ÿ

 ÿ
`
`"
`
`

ÿÿ ÿ ÿ#
`ÿ$%&'()*+ÿ
`ÿÿÿ
`

 ,ÿ   ÿÿ  ÿÿ ÿ  

ÿ


`ÿ

` ÿ ÿ
`ÿ
`

 ÿ

  ÿ
`


`

ÿÿ-(ÿ&/ÿ011*/ÿ-(2ÿ3ÿ456575ÿ4845ÿ9ÿ
`:4;578<ÿ

ÿ=ÿ> ÿ
`ÿ3ÿ5:ÿ4845?ÿ> 
`ÿ ?@ÿ$//ÿA*$'ÿ
`-(ÿ&/ÿB'')*/ÿCCDÿ3ÿ4565E8ÿ4845ÿ9ÿ<<4E7;;ÿ

ÿ=<ÿ> ÿ
`ÿ
`F 

ÿ4Eÿ4845?ÿÿÿ
`GHIJKLMNÿIPÿQKIIPRÿÿS ÿ

 ÿ

 ÿ  ÿÿÿ
`   
`ÿ

ÿ 

ÿÿ
`


` ÿ
`ÿ3 Tÿ


`
`
`


`

ÿ 

ÿ ÿ

 ÿ  ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ"ÿ 
`ÿ
`!ÿ  

ÿ


` ÿÿ/U%V/&ÿ ÿÿW

ÿ


`ÿ  

ÿ
`
`

 

ÿ



ÿ ÿ  

ÿ ÿ
`  

ÿÿÿ

ÿ"
` 

ÿ
`ÿ

 ÿ
`ÿÿX//ÿ-(ÿ&/ÿYZ(U1/&ÿ[/%\'&]$^ÿ-(2_ÿ5<ÿ<


`55ÿ545ÿ> ÿ
`ÿ4845?
`G`ILabÿcdeMKMNeRÿÿS ÿ

 ÿ

 ÿ  

ÿ
`
`ÿ
` ÿ

ÿ

 ÿ
`

`  ÿ
`ÿ3 Tÿ

 ÿ
`


`

ÿ 

ÿ
` 

ÿ3 T!ÿ


`ÿ
`

 

ÿ" ÿÿ
`

 ÿ ÿ

ÿf !ÿ  ÿ   ÿ
`
`ÿÿ
`ÿ  

ÿÿ  

ÿ  

ÿ



ÿ 
`ÿÿX//^
`/_)_ÿ-(ÿ&/ÿ011*/ÿ-(2ÿ3ÿ4465Eÿ4844ÿ9ÿ5gEg<88ÿ

ÿ=4ÿ> ÿ
`
`hÿ4gÿ4844?
`GiIJKeÿLIdjMNecIdRÿÿ ÿ
`


`

ÿ 

ÿ
` ÿ

 ÿ 

` 

`ÿ

ÿ
`

ÿ

 ÿ" ÿ ÿÿ

 ÿ 

!ÿ"
`
`


`

ÿ   ÿÿ ÿ


`ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿYZ(U1/&ÿ[/%\'&]$^ÿ-(2
`5<ÿ<

ÿ

ÿ544
`kÿ

  ÿ  

ÿÿ

 ÿ
`  ÿ"  ÿ

 ÿ
`


`

ÿ 

ÿ ÿ
`"  ÿ
`

ÿ
`

`ÿÿ ÿ

 ÿ 

!ÿ ÿ ÿ 

ÿ

 ÿ
`
`ÿ
`
`

 ÿ ÿ ÿ  ÿÿÿÿÿ
`

 

ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ 
`
` ÿÿ

 ÿÿÿ

ÿ
`ÿ
`

ÿ

 ÿ
`T

 ÿ

 ÿ 

ÿ 

`ÿÿ

`ÿ" ÿ

ÿ ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 13 of 52
`Cagase:-22NDooPommeantotunteeaed2 Filed:2/28/2022 page 13 of 52
`
`this Court has held that those factors cannot prevent transfer where, as
`
`here, the otherfactors clearly favor transfer. This Court should issue a
`
`writ of mandamusdirecting transfer to NDCA.
`
`ISSUE PRESENTED
`
`Whetherthe district court clearly abused its discretion in refusing
`
`to transfer this case to NDCA.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`I.
`
`Flyp Sues Google In WDTX,Despite the Fact that NDCAIs
`Clearly the Suit’s Center of Gravity
`
`^_`abÿdefggdÿÿÿÿÿÿhijklamnbÿdfgÿÿÿÿÿo_pabÿgdÿÿÿÿÿqrsatbÿgdudeudvdd
` ÿ ÿ
`ÿ 

ÿ
`ÿ ÿ
` ÿ
`ÿ ÿ
` ÿ  ÿ
`ÿ
`  ÿ ÿ  ÿ
` ÿ


`

ÿ
` ÿ
` ÿÿ ÿ ÿ 

ÿÿ
`ÿ
` ÿÿ
`
`ÿ  ÿ
` ÿÿÿ
`
` ÿ"#  $% &ÿ
`'   ÿ ÿ  ÿ ÿ


`

ÿ
`( ÿÿ  ÿÿ ÿ
`ÿ
` ÿ ÿ
`ÿÿÿ
`%)% * $%ÿ+,ÿ,)-%ÿ
`.,/01ÿ234ÿ5667/3ÿ8ÿ9&%:;ÿ&341<=3ÿ=>3ÿ,?@=ÿ=>?=ÿ$&-)ÿ4
`-/3?A/0ÿ=>3ÿ2<=B4ÿ-38=3Aÿ6Cÿ5A?D<=0
`EÿF
`
` ÿGHGGÿI

ÿ ÿJ

ÿÿ ÿ'
`ÿ ÿÿ'K
`
`

ÿ ÿÿÿ
`ÿÿLHHMNHHOÿÿ ÿ
`ÿ
`  ÿ
` ÿ
` ÿÿ ÿ
`ÿ
`

ÿ 

`ÿÿPÿ
` ÿ  ÿ ÿ
` 

 ÿ

 ÿ
`

QÿÿRSTSÿLHMUUÿÿI

ÿ
`

ÿ
`ÿJ

ÿ
`
`Vÿ ÿ 
`ÿ

`ÿÿ
` ÿ
`  ÿ
`ÿÿLHWXNHYGWÿ
` ÿZÿ ÿÿ
`ÿÿÿÿ  ÿ
` ÿÿ(
` ÿÿ
`'Kÿ
` ÿ ÿ[ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ( ÿ ÿ
`  ÿ
`ÿ
` ÿ ÿ
`
` ÿ  ÿ
` ÿ 
` 

ÿÿÿÿÿ
`
`).%>3ÿ"?A=<34
`J

ÿÿ
`ÿ
`

 
`N(
` ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ(ÿ 
` \
`   ÿ
`ÿÿÿÿ ÿÿUWW]ÿÿLHUH]ÿÿ ÿ 
` \
`  ÿ
` ÿ
`ÿ
`
`In January 2022, Flyp sued Google in the Waco division of WDTX,
`
`alleging infringement of five patents. Appx0046-0047. Those patents,
`
`which are part of the same family, relate to “systems and methodsfor
`
`delivering telephone calls.” E.g., Appx0611. Flyp alleges that Google
`
`Voice infringes certain claims of each asserted patent. Appx0493-0529.
`
`This suit’s center of gravity is NDCA. Neither party is based in
`
`WDTX,andthe key sources of proof for both the asserted patents and the
`
`accused product are primarily in NDCA.
`
`A.
`
`The Parties
`
`Google is a California-based company that has been headquartered
`
`in NDCAsinceits founding in 1998. Appx0108. Those headquarters and
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 14 of 52
`Cagase:-22-NDooPommeantotuntesaed> Filed:2/28/2022 Page 14 of 52
`MATERIAL SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER HAS BEEN DELETED
`
`surrounding offices, which employ more than half of Google’s U.S.
`
`workforce, serve as the strategic center of Google’s business. Appx0108.
`
`The most important design and engineering decisions for the accused
`
`Google Voice product are made in NDCA. See Appx0112-0115. And
`
`although a few Google employees with knowledge pertaining to Google
`
`Voice reside in or around WDTX, noneis a key decisionmaker or was
`
`involved in development of the product’s accused functionality. See
`
`GHIJKÿMNOPPMÿÿÿÿÿÿQRSTUJVWKÿMOPÿÿÿÿÿXHYJKÿPNÿÿÿÿÿZ[\J]KÿPM^MN^M_MM
`:#?@ABÿ6C?'#ÿ#DÿÿE@D#?'#A$?ÿD@&?@ÿFÿ6??%ÿ&?B?#?&
`   ÿ
`
`

 ÿÿ

ÿ

ÿÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ 

ÿÿ
`
`

ÿ



ÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ



ÿ
`ÿ 

ÿ 

ÿÿ ! "ÿ
`#

ÿÿÿ

 ÿÿ

 

 ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ

ÿ 

ÿ
` 

ÿ$

ÿ ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿ%&'ÿÿ())ÿ !!+, !!ÿÿÿ
` ÿÿ
`

ÿ 

ÿ



ÿÿ



ÿ

 ÿÿ 

ÿ
`$

ÿ



ÿÿÿ ÿ-&#. ÿ

ÿÿÿ

ÿ



ÿÿÿ
`

ÿÿ





ÿ
`ÿ

ÿ ÿ 

ÿ
` ÿÿ())ÿ
` !!+, !!/ÿ0))ÿ1203ÿ!!",!!4 ÿÿ
`5ÿÿÿ&



ÿÿÿÿ 

ÿ

ÿÿ6


` ÿ
`#

ÿÿ !78, !9 ÿÿ:ÿ
`ÿÿ
` ÿ
`ÿ



ÿÿÿ



ÿ
`6


`ÿÿ& ÿ#

 ÿÿ
`ÿÿ

ÿÿ%&#.!ÿÿ ; , ;!ÿÿ
`5ÿ

ÿÿ#

ÿÿ



/ÿÿ+ !9 ÿ

ÿ5ÿ
`

ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ
`

ÿÿ

ÿ



ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ

 ÿÿ<ÿ
`
`

=ÿÿÿ
`<#  ÿ> =ÿ !79 ÿÿÿ

ÿ
`
`

ÿ



ÿ

ÿÿ
`'

 ÿÿ? ÿÿ !79ÿÿÿ
`#

%

%

`!ÿ6

`

ÿ

ÿÿ  ÿ 

ÿ

ÿÿ5ÿ ÿ:ÿ
` ÿ
`



ÿÿ-&#.ÿÿ!! ÿÿ5ÿ

 ÿ



 ÿÿ:ÿ
`



ÿÿ%&#. ÿÿ

ÿÿ ÿ



ÿÿÿ

 ÿÿ%&#.ÿ
` !+ÿÿ5ÿ 

ÿ
`ÿÿ

 ÿ



`

ÿ 

ÿ

ÿ:ÿ
`%

`ÿÿÿ%&#.ÿ

ÿÿÿ
`ÿ
`
`1 Before the district court, Google stated that Flyp’s (AGG, Mr. NETH.
`resides in WDTX. Appx1150. Flyp stated, however, that Mr. Ett
`resides in NDTX, andthedistrict court treated him as residing in NDTX.
`Appx0012. For purposes of this petition, therefore, Google treats Mr.
`as an NDTX witness.
`
`Appx0112-0115; see also Appx1158-1170.
`
`Flyp is a Delaware corporation that is currently based in Bedford,
`
`Texas. Appx0139-0140. Mostof its handful of employees work in either
`
`Bedford or Dallas, Texas, both of which are in NDTX.! Appx0560-0561.
`
`Flyp arrived in Texas only recently; in 2014, when Flypfiled thefirst
`
`patent in the asserted family of patents, its “principal office” was in
`
`“Tucson, AZ,” Appx0134, and its corporate officers were located in
`
`Connecticut and England. Appx0134.
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 15 of 52
`Cagase:-22-NDooPommeanttotuntessed2 Filed:2/28/2022 page 15 of 52
`
`B.
`
`The Asserted Patents
`
`The five asserted patents are membersof a single patent family,
`
`which Flyp began prosecuting in 2014. See Appx0610-0685. As in any
`
`IJKLMÿOPQRROÿÿÿÿÿÿSTUVWLXYMÿOQRÿÿÿÿÿZJ[LMÿR\ÿÿÿÿÿ]^_L`MÿROaOPaObOO
` ÿ 
`

ÿ 
`ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ !ÿÿ!"#ÿ
`$%ÿ&!"ÿ ÿ%' ÿÿ()*+,ÿÿ-..ÿ01)*)2)34,ÿÿ0ÿÿ"ÿ
`ÿ ÿ'#ÿÿ!#ÿ%%!5#ÿ!"#ÿ
`ÿ%!"ÿÿÿÿ!"ÿ$!!ÿÿ!ÿÿ!!"ÿÿ
` ,ÿÿ6'ÿ!"ÿÿ!!ÿ%ÿÿÿ'%ÿÿÿ!ÿÿÿ
`'ÿ%ÿÿ'ÿÿ789,ÿÿÿ
`ÿ!:ÿÿÿÿ%ÿ'ÿÿ!ÿÿ
`%%!5ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!%ÿ'ÿÿ789,ÿÿ
`&!"ÿÿÿ"ÿÿ !ÿ;$! !ÿ$ÿÿ789,ÿÿ-..ÿ
`01)44<2)4=,ÿÿ>#ÿÿ$ÿÿ'%ÿÿÿÿÿ?8@0ÿ
`ÿ!$,ÿÿ&!":ÿ%'ÿ%'!ÿ!ÿÿ?8@0,ÿÿ01))*A2
`))()BÿC..ÿ01)*4+,ÿÿDÿÿ"ÿ!ÿÿÿÿ!ÿÿ
`D;!#ÿ01)4)#ÿÿÿ!ÿÿ05,ÿÿ01)**,ÿÿ&!":ÿ
`%'ÿ!"ÿÿ$ÿÿ&!"ÿ!"ÿÿÿ?89E
`!' ÿ&!"ÿFÿÿÿ%%ÿ;$! ÿÿ%ÿ!"ÿ
`ÿÿ$'!ÿÿÿÿÿ%,Gÿÿ01))*=BÿC..ÿ01)44<2
`)4=,ÿÿH#ÿ$'ÿ" ÿ"ÿ%%ÿ!%%ÿÿ"%!ÿ
`ÿ
`
`patent infringement suit, the development, commercialization, validity,
`
`and enforceability of that patent family will be relevant to liability and
`
`damages. But only a small fraction of the sources of proof related to those
`
`issues can be found in WDTX.
`
`The lion’s share of the evidence about the development and
`
`commercialization of the asserted patents is located outside of WDTX.
`
`Flyp did not identify a single knowledgeable witness in WDTX. See
`
`Appx0557-0563. Instead, the witnesses and sources of proof are in NDCA
`
`and elsewhere. Flyp’s prosecution counsel lives in NDCA. Appx0019-
`
`0020; see Appx0154. One third party listed as an inventor lives in
`
`Oklahoma, Appx0560, and another lives in Arizona. Appx0611. Flyp’s
`
`current employees and two former Flyp employees are in NDTX—
`
`although Flyp “has not identified specific knowledge that each employee
`
`possesses that would be neededin this case.” Appx0013; see Appx0557-
`
`0563. Moreover, without identifying any specific electronic or physical
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00031-ADA Document 90-2 Filed 01/20/23 Page 16 of 52
`Cagase:-22-NDooPommeanttotuntesaed-D Filed:2/28/2022 page 16 of 52
`
`documents, Flyp has asserted that its sources of proof are also in NDTX.
`
`See Appx0016.
`
`In contrast, evidence about the validity of the asserted patents is
`
`concentrated in NDCA. Google identified 16 third-party witnesses who
`
`can provide relevant testimony regarding invalidity, all of whom reside
`
`in NDCA. Nine of those witnesses are named inventors of prior-art
`
`references. Appx0171-0172; Appx0190-0210; Appx0231-235; Appx0278-
`
`0289. Five are employeesof third-party corporations that manufactured
`
`prior-art systems,
`
`like RingCentral Office and Cisco BroadWorks.
`
`Appx0305-0310; Appx0397-0405.
`
`Two
`
`founded GrandCentral
`
`@ABCDÿFGHIIFÿÿÿÿÿÿJKLMNCOPDÿFHIÿÿÿÿÿQARCDÿISÿÿÿÿÿTUVCWDÿIFXFGXFYFF
` 
`ÿ

ÿ
`ÿ
`
` ÿ  ÿ
`ÿ
` 
`ÿ ÿ ÿÿ
` ÿÿÿ
`ÿ !ÿÿÿ
`"ÿ  
` ÿ#ÿ$  ÿ ÿ#  ÿ ÿ ÿ
`
` ÿ 
`ÿ
`ÿ
`   ÿÿ%ÿÿ& ' ÿ ÿ !ÿ ( ÿ) 
`
`
`ÿ) ÿ
`ÿ #ÿ # ÿ 
`  ÿ''ÿ#  ÿ ÿ ÿ) ÿ
`ÿ
`ÿ%ÿÿÿ ÿ 
`ÿ) 
`
`
`ÿÿÿ# 
`ÿ ÿ ( ÿ
`
`ÿÿ ( *+ÿ ,(* +ÿ*- (*-.+ÿ*/(
`*/,ÿÿ

#ÿÿ 
`ÿ ÿ ( ÿ    
`ÿ  ÿ ÿ
` ( ÿ
`
` 
`ÿ 0ÿ1'%  ÿ2ÿÿ%
` ÿ3 4 0
`ÿ
`-.(- +ÿ-,(5.ÿÿ) ÿ ÿ&%  ÿ
`%   
`ÿ67&%  89ÿ ÿ
`
` ÿ ÿ& ' ÿ: ÿÿ
` ÿ ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ ( ÿ
`
` ÿÿ5!(5 *ÿÿ& ' ÿ
`
` $ 
`ÿ ÿ #ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ) 
`
`
`ÿ  'ÿ 
`#ÿ ÿ
` ÿ#ÿÿÿ **( *!ÿÿ&#ÿ ÿ$  ÿ# $ ÿ
`    ÿ ÿ 
`ÿ ( ÿ
`ÿ ÿ
`ÿ' ÿ
` ÿ ÿ
`$ #ÿ ÿ) 
`
`
`ÿ#ÿ ÿ   ÿÿ 
`ÿ  ÿ  ÿ
`$ÿ
`#ÿÿÿ#  ÿ
`ÿÿ;ÿ<=<ÿ- (-,!ÿÿÿ
`>0)
`ÿ#ÿ$  ÿ ÿ $  ÿ ÿ