EXHIBIT 2

Case 2:23-cv-00352-JRG-RSP Document 72-2 Filed 08/07/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 1930
Kate Dominguez 

Direct: +1 212.351.2338 

Fax: +1 212.716.0839 

KDominguez@gibsondunn.com 

 

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 

200 Park Avenue 

New York, NY 10166-0193 

Tel 212.351.4000 

gibsondunn.com 

 Abu Dhabi  Beijing  Brussels  Century City  Dallas  Denver  Dubai  Frankfurt  Hong Kong  Houston  London  Los Angeles 

Munich  New York  Orange County  Palo Alto  Paris  San Francisco  Singapore  Washington, D.C. 

November 1, 2023 

Marc Fenster 

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

Re: Headwater Research LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al., No. 23-cv-00352 

(E.D. Tex.)

Dear Mr. Fenster: 

I write on behalf of Verizon regarding the Infringement Contentions served by Plaintiff 

Headwater Research LLC (“Headwater”) on September 28, 2023, in the above-captioned 

action. 

We understand that for each of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,589,541, 8,924,543, 9,198,042 and 

9,215,613 (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”), Headwater accuses “smartphones, basic 

phones, tablets, laptops, and hotspot devices sold (including those sold in bundles with data 

plans) or used by Verizon for use with Verizon’s wireless network services,” and includes a 

list of accused device models. Sept. 28, 2023 Infringement Contentions at 2–7. The items in 

these lists are identified as “comprising Apple software” or “Android software” and include 

solely end-user devices. Id. Similarly, each of the claim charts attached to Headwater’s 

infringement contentions identifies the “Accused Instrumentalities” as “smartphones, basic 

phones, tablets, laptops, and hotspot devices sold (including those sold in bundles with data 

plans) or used by Verizon for use with Verizon’s wireless network services.” Id., Exs. A–D. 

Based on these contentions, including the lists of accused devices provided, Verizon 

understands that Headwater accuses solely end-user devices and functionality for each of the 

Asserted Patents. Nevertheless, Headwater’s infringement contentions also include, for each 

Asserted Patent, a vague reference to “[s]ervers, hardware, software, and services leased, 

owned, supported, and/or operated by Verizon comprising Verizon’s wireless network services 

functionality.” E.g. id. at 2. No specific servers or other network hardware or software are 

identified, nor are any network elements mentioned or depicted in the charts attached to 

Headwater’s contentions. See id., Exs. A–D. 

Headwater’s infringement contentions with respect to at least its vague references to “[s]ervers, 

hardware, software, and services” and “Verizon’s wireless network” are deficient in that they 

fail to comply with Local Patent Rule 3-1. P.R. 3-1 requires that the identification of accused 

instrumentalities “shall be as specific as possible,” including the “name or model number, if 

known,” of each accused instrumentality. P.R. 3-1(b). Headwater’s vague and unexplained 

references to “[s]ervers, hardware, software, and services”—terms which could apply to 

countless elements of “Verizon’s wireless network” or to the accused mobile devices—do not 

Case 2:23-cv-00352-JRG-RSP Document 72-2 Filed 08/07/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 1931
Marc Fenster 

Russ August & Kabat 

November 1, 2023 

Page 2 

 

reasonably provide notice to Verizon as to which component(s) Headwater purports to accuse, 

let alone the “specific” allegations required by P.R. 3-1. 

Accordingly, Verizon understands the scope of Headwater’s infringement allegations to be 

limited to the accused end-user devices and functionality—i.e. “[p]hones, tables, wearables, 

[or] devices ... for use with Verizon’s wireless network services,” and will carry out its 

discovery obligations in this case consistent with that understanding. Although Verizon does 

not agree the contentions for those instrumentalities comply with Local Patent Rule 3-1, and 

Verizon may seek relief with respect to additional deficiencies in the contentions at a later 

time, Verizon focuses this letter on Headwater’s deficient network-related allegations. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ Kate Dominguez

Kate Dominguez 

Case 2:23-cv-00352-JRG-RSP Document 72-2 Filed 08/07/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 1932