Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 23036

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

I/P ENGINE, INC., Plaintiff, v. AOL, INC. et al., Defendants.

Civ. Action No. 2:11-cv-512

PLAINTIFF I/P ENGINES OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO EXPEDITE BRIEFING Defendants request to expedite the briefing on Defendants Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for PostJudgment Royalties should be denied. Plaintiffs Motion for Post Judgment Damages was filed almost four months ago. Any timing issues relating to the current motion schedule are of Defendants own making at all times, I/P Engine acted diligently and in good faith regarding Defendants request for an extension. I/P Engine filed its Motion for Post Judgment Damages on December 18, 2012. On April 3, 2013, the Court reset the briefing schedule for Defendants opposition to April 18, and I/P Engines reply to April 25. After the close of business on April 8, Defendants demanded that Dr. Becker be provided for deposition at least 5 days before [their] opposition is due in other words, in the next three days.1 Defendants did not request an extension of the briefing schedule at that time. At a meet and confer on April 9, Defendants did not pursue their request to depose

(See Ex. 1) I/P Engine has consistently opposed since January the further deposition of Dr. Becker. 1

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 4 PageID# 23037

Dr. Becker. Instead, during that meet and confer, Defendants were preoccupied with their suggestion that because Google might attempt to implement an alleged design around at some future date, all briefing should be postponed. Defendants made no proposal at that time, but said that they would send a proposed schedule sometime later. (Ex. 2) It was not until late Friday afternoon, that Defendants sent their proposal. (Ex. 3) Upon receipt, I/P Engine immediately asked for clarification regarding the proposal. (Ex. 4) The parties then discussed the issue by phone the morning of Monday, April 15, 2012 (approximately 11:51 AM (ET)/8:51 AM (PT)). It was not until this conversation that Defendants clarified their request. I/P Engine did not respond to, much less accept, Defendants request during that conversation. After considering Defendants request, I/P Engine advised Defendants at 2:40 PM (ET)/11:40 AM (PT) that I/P Engine would not agree to a further delay of the briefing schedule. (Ex. 5)

Dated: April 16, 2013

By: /s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood Donald C. Schultz (Virginia Bar No. 30531) W. Ryan Snow (Virginia Bar No. 47423) CRENSHAW, WARE & MARTIN PLC 150 West Main Street Norfolk, VA 23510 Telephone: (757) 623-3000 Facsimile: (757) 623-5735 Jeffrey K. Sherwood (Virginia Bar No. 19222) Frank C. Cimino, Jr. Kenneth W. Brothers Charles J. Monterio, Jr. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 1825 Eye Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 420-2200 Facsimile: (202) 420-2201

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927 Filed 04/16/13 Page 3 of 4 PageID# 23038

Dawn Rudenko Albert DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 1633 Broadway New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 277-6715 Facsimile: (212) 277-6501 Counsel for Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc.

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927 Filed 04/16/13 Page 4 of 4 PageID# 23039

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 16, 2013, the foregoing PLAINTIFF I/P ENGINES OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO EXPEDITE BRIEFING, was served via the Courts CM/ECF system on the following:

Stephen Edward Noona Kaufman & Canoles, P.C. 150 W Main St Suite 2100 Norfolk, VA 23510 senoona@kaufcan.com David Bilsker David Perlson Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 davidbilsker@quinnemanuel.com davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com Robert L. Burns Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Two Freedom Square 11955 Freedom Drive Reston, VA 20190 robert.burns@finnegan.com Cortney S. Alexander Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 3500 SunTrust Plaza 303 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta, GA 94111 cortney.alexander@finnegan.com

/s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-1 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 23040

Exhibit 1

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-1 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 23041

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-1 Filed 04/16/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 23042 applicable law, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, copying or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Kaufman & Canoles at (757) 624-3000 or by return e-mail to helpdesk@kaufcan.com, and purge the communication immediately without making any copy or distribution. Disclosure Required by Internal Revenue Service Circular 230: This communication is not a tax opinion. To the extent it contains tax advice, it is not intended or written by the practitioner to be used, and it cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service.

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-2 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID# 23043

Exhibit 2

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-2 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID# 23044

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-3 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 23045

Exhibit 3

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-3 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 23046

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-3 Filed 04/16/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 23047

50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 415-875-6316 Direct 415.875.6600 Main Office Number 415.875.6700 FAX margaretkammerud@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com
NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-4 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 23048

Exhibit 4

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-4 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 23049

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-4 Filed 04/16/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 23050

Best, Meg ProposedSchedule: May17Sourcecodeavailableforreview OnorbeforeJune7ProvideBartholomewFurrowfordeposition June21Plaintifftoserveanyadditionalexpertdeclarationorrevisedmotion. July2Dr.Becker(oranyotherexpertonwhomPlaintiffmayrely)willbemadeavailablefordeposition bythisdate. Defendantswillhavetwoweeksfromfinalexpert(s)depositiontofileopposition. Plaintiffwillhavetwoweeksfromfilingofoppositiontofilereply.

Margaret P. Kammerud Associate,

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 415-875-6316 Direct 415.875.6600 Main Office Number 415.875.6700 FAX margaretkammerud@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com
NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-5 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 23051

Exhibit 5

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-5 Filed 04/16/13 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 23052

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-5 Filed 04/16/13 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 23053

David Perlson Partner, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 415-875-6344 Direct 415.875.6600 Main Office Number 415.875.6700 FAX davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.

From: Monterio, Charles [mailto:MonterioC@dicksteinshapiro.com] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 3:30 PM To: Margaret P. Kammerud; zz-IPEngine Cc: QE-IP Engine; 'Noona, Stephen E.'; 'W. Ryan Snow (wrsnow@cwm-law.com)'; 'Donald C. Schultz (dschultz@cwmlaw.com)' Subject: RE: I/P Engine v. Google -- Proposed Schedule for Post-Judgment Damages

Meg, Itseemsthatthereisadisconnectinwhatwediscussedduringourcallearlierthisweek.Weneveragreedthat extendingthebriefingscheduleconcerningI/PEnginesongoingroyaltiesmotionwasappropriate.Duringthemeetand confer,weagreedtoconsiderasubsequentproposalfromDefendantstoaddresstheallegedissuesthatDefendants believeexistbasedonGooglesfutureimplementationofanallegedly,noninfringingAdWordssystem.WhileI/P EnginedoesnotunderstandfullywhyDefendantsbelievethisfutureAdWordssystemimpactstheongoingroyalties briefingotherthanpotentiallyestablishingasunsetdate,wewerewillingtoconsideryourproposalandexplanationfor it. Basedonyouremailbelow,itisunclearastowhattypeofextensionanddiscoveryrelatingtoboththecurrentbriefing scheduleanddiscoveryrelatingtoGooglesclaimeddesignaroundyouareproposing. Pleaseclarifysothatwecanconsiderandrespond. Charles (202)4205167
Confidentiality Statement This email message, including any attachments, is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential material. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, printing, copying, or other dissemination of this email message is strictly proh bited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply email message or notify our email administrator at postmaster@dicksteinshapiro.com and permanently delete and destroy the original message and any and all copies, including printouts and electronic copies on any computer system. Dickstein Shapiro LLP www.DicksteinShapiro.com

From: Margaret P. Kammerud [mailto:margaretkammerud@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 4:56 PM To: Monterio, Charles; zz-IPEngine Cc: QE-IP Engine; 'Noona, Stephen E.'; 'W. Ryan Snow (wrsnow@cwm-law.com)'; 'Donald C. Schultz (dschultz@cwm-

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-5 Filed 04/16/13 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 23054

law.com)' Subject: I/P Engine v. Google -- Proposed Schedule for Post-Judgment Damages

Charles, Asdiscussedonourcallthisweek,thepartiesareinagreementthatsomeextensiontothepresentbriefingschedule concerningPlaintiffsmotionforpostjudgmentdamagesisappropriate. InordertoallowPlaintiffampletimefordiscoveryconcerningthelaunchofachangeintheoperationofAdWordsand toallowDefendantsamplediscoveryconcerningPlaintiffspostjudgmentdamagetheories,weproposethefollowing schedule.BartholomewFurrowwillbetravelingoutsidethecountryinMayandearlyJune,soatthispoint,June7isthe earliestdepositiondatewecanofferforhim Pleaseletusknowifyouareamenabletothisschedule,andwewillprepareamotionseekingthisextension. Ininterim,whileyouareconsideringthisproposal,canyouconfirmthatPlaintiffwillagreetoanadditionaltwoweeks fortheDefendantsoppositionbrief?Wewillobviouslyreciprocatewithyourreply. Best, Meg ProposedSchedule: May17Sourcecodeavailableforreview OnorbeforeJune7ProvideBartholomewFurrowfordeposition June21Plaintifftoserveanyadditionalexpertdeclarationorrevisedmotion. July2Dr.Becker(oranyotherexpertonwhomPlaintiffmayrely)willbemadeavailablefordeposition bythisdate. Defendantswillhavetwoweeksfromfinalexpert(s)depositiontofileopposition. Plaintiffwillhavetwoweeksfromfilingofoppositiontofilereply.

Margaret P. Kammerud Associate,

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 415-875-6316 Direct 415.875.6600 Main Office Number 415.875.6700 FAX margaretkammerud@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com
3

Case 2:11-cv-00512-RAJ-TEM Document 927-5 Filed 04/16/13 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 23055

NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.