Neural AI, LLC v. Google, Inc. — Entry #7: Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, filed by Google, Inc., re 1 MOTION to Compel Compliance with Subpoena Served on Third-Party Google, LLC filed by Petitioner…

Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS   Document 7-2   Filed 08/25/26   Page 1 of 17


             EXHIBIT A


                 Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2       Filed 08/25/26       Page 2 of 17


From:                                 Jaffe, Jordan
Sent:                                 Friday, August 21, 2026 1:19 PM
To:                                   Rocco Magni; Tanner Laiche; Desai, Neil
Cc:                                   McKone, Mercedes; Max Tribble; Brian Melton; Samuel Drezdzon;
                                      max@ciccarellilawfirm.com; Tamar Lusztig; Emily Portuguese; msiegmund; Grubbs,
                                      Deborah; Browder, Sissel; Margo, Ben; Wang, Jing (SF Associate); Pierce, Naomi; Arenas,
                                      G. Grace; Davidson, Nancy Fronda-
Subject:                              RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)


Rocco,

We respectfully disagree; there is no “false record.” The correspondence speaks for itself and supports
our position. We will otherwise address these points in our opposition.

Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2026 6:02 PM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - rmagni@susmangodfrey.com


Jordan,

I’m not sure why you are trying to create a false record. You and I were on a zoom back in July where I
talked through a subset of information that we were looking for and said if you provided that information
(e.g. the NVIDIA applications/frameworks that your client uses; documents sufficient to define the
software stack), we would consider Google to have produced sufficient documents. We told you
precisely what we were looking for. That was us discussing how to narrow the requests. We would
narrow them to just call for that info. You said you would investigate those issues with your client. That
was well before any suggestion of a declaration.

--
Rocco F. Magni
                                                                  1


                 Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2    Filed 08/25/26       Page 3 of 17

Partner | Susman Godfrey LLP
Office: 713.653.7861
Cell: 512.514.3519
Firm Bio
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this message in error, please notify the
sender and delete it immediately.
From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 at 4:02 PM
To: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXTERNAL Email
Rocco,
We respectfully disagree and the correspondence speaks for itself on these matters. Google never
“made clear it intended to produce zero documents.” It was Neural AI that suggested a declaration in
lieu of producing documents and lead to the current record. Neural AI has never met and conferred on
its specific pending document requests to address Google’s well-founded objections. To the extent that
Neural AI had such a proposal, it should have provided one and met and conferred on it before filing any
motion to compel.
Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 12:07 PM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - rmagni@susmangodfrey.com


                                                                  2


                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS            Document 7-2         Filed 08/25/26       Page 4 of 17

We completely disagree. We have made every effort to reduce your burden. It is Google that has
repeatedly made clear it intended to produce zero documents, making a request by request discussion
completely futile (something I inquired about on one of our first meet and confers). We offered a
declaration to ease your burden and offered to narrow all requests only to the scope of documents
sufficient to show the information in the template. So it is inaccurate to suggest that we never offered to
narrow the scope of the requests. You are free to moot our motion at any time. Thanks.

--
Rocco F. Magni
Partner | Susman Godfrey LLP
Office: 713.653.7861
Cell: 512.514.3519
Firm Bio
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this message in error, please notify the
sender and delete it immediately.
From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 at 1:53 PM
To: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Tanner,
 I write in response to your emails from earlier today.
First, as you know, Google offered a follow up meet and confer last week. Google received no response
until this past weekend. Google then followed up Monday morning and met and conferred the same day,
asking specific a question of Neural AI regarding paragraph 11 of the proposed declaration. Neural AI
did not substantively respond until 12:03 pm Central today (August 18) with a revised declaration that
Google has never seen before, and a new position regarding document production in the alternative.
In that same email, Neural AI states “we intend to file a motion solely to preserve our rights and avoid any
potential waiver of discovery from Google.” Needless to say, Google and Neural AI have not met and
conferred regarding Neural AI’s latest positions and revised declaration. Assuming that Neural AI
intends to file its motion in the Western District of Texas, which Google does not concede is proper as
stated in its subpoena objections, Neural AI anticipated motion is not compliant with the local
rules. Specifically:
         Conference Required. The court may refuse to hear or may deny a nondispositive motion unless
         the movant advises the court within the body of the motion that counsel for the parties have
         conferred in a good-faith attempt to resolve the matter by agreement and certifies the specific
         reason that no agreement could be made. If there is any ambiguity about whether a motion is
         dispositive or nondispositive, the parties should confer. Movants are encouraged to indicate in
         the title of the motion whether the motion is opposed. A motion is unopposed only if there has
                                                             3


                 Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2    Filed 08/25/26   Page 5 of 17

        been an actual conference with opposing counsel and there is no opposition to any of the relief
        requested in the motion.
To the extent that Neural AI states that “the parties have conferred in a good-faith attempt to resolve the
matter by agreement and certifies the specific reason that no agreement could be made” in its motion,
that is simply not true. How could we have met and conferred regarding a revised declaration and
position we only received hours before filing? The timing is also entirely of Neural AI’s own making
because it did not timely respond to Google’s offers to meet and confer last week. Google reserves all
rights to raise this issue in opposition or otherwise.
 Second, as Google has consistently noted, Neural AI has entirely failed to narrow the scope of any of its
document requests or subpoena topics. We have not discussed any of the specific requests or topics at
any point. Instead, Neural AI has chosen to focus on a form declaration, of which it only provided a
revised version earlier today. At this juncture, Google is not aware of what specific document requests
or deposition topics Neural AI is seeking to compel, and at what scope. This is further evidence that any
motion to compel would be a violation of WDTX local rules.
In addition, as Google has repeatedly explained, the scope of Neural AI’s current subpoena requests is
vastly overbroad and not proportional to the needs of the case. To date, Neural AI has not responded to
any of Google’s objections, taken up Google’s offer to meet and confer on them in the context of any
specific request or topic, or addressed Judge Gilliland’s order finding its subpoena requests to Dell
overbroad in many respects.
Accordingly, by filing a motion on this record, Neural AI has not taken reasonable steps to avoid imposing
undue burden or expense on Google as the subject of the subpoena. This is a violation of FRCP 45(d)(1).
Google reserves all rights.
Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 10:02 AM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com


Counsel,

Following up on our discussion yesterday, please see the attached revised declaration addressing
Paragraph 11, which we believe accurately reflects Google’s operations.


                                                                  4


                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS              Document 7-2          Filed 08/25/26        Page 6 of 17

To reduce the burden on Google, NAI is willing to consider Google’s discovery obligations satisfied if
Google either (1) executes a revised declaration addressing the issues identified in the attached draft
without material gaps, or (2) produces documents sufficient to establish each of those issues. We are, of
course, happy to discuss any further revisions Google believes are necessary to ensure the declaration is
accurate while still addressing the material issues underlying NAI’s requests.

Regards,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK
This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information, which may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or
attorney work product protection. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately.


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 at 5:07 AM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil
<ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
Jordan,

Thanks for the call. After discussing internally, we are comfortable with language stating that, in
conjunction with Paragraph 11 regarding various forms of shared memory, Google uses a CPU to initiate
model inference and/or uses a CPU to pass input data to and interact with the ML model running on the
GPU.

Given today’s deadline, we intend to file a motion solely to preserve our rights and avoid any potential
waiver of discovery from Google. We will continue working with Google toward a resolution and will
promptly withdraw the motion if the parties are able to resolve the subpoena discovery.

Regards,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK
This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information, which may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or
attorney work product protection. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately.

                                                               5


                 Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2    Filed 08/25/26   Page 7 of 17

From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Monday, August 17, 2026 at 10:50 AM
To: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Tanner,

I can do 4:30 pm PT. Please send an invite if that works for you.

Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2026 3:06 PM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com


Counsel,

Apologies for the delayed response—I was in depositions last week. I am available tomorrow after 2:00
pm PT. Please let me know if a time in that window works for you.

Thanks,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP


                                                                  6


                 Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2       Filed 08/25/26        Page 8 of 17
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK
This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information, which may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or
attorney work product protection. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately.


From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 2026 at 3:39 PM
To: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Tanner,

We have an update on our end. Please let us know if you’re available to meet and confer tomorrow. We
can be between 9am and noon PT. Alternatively, if easier, I’m available this afternoon between now and
5:30 pm pt.

Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 9:48 AM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com


Counsel,

Thank you for your email.
                                                                  7


               Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS            Document 7-2   Filed 08/25/26   Page 9 of 17


As an update, NVIDIA has agreed to extend Neural AI’s deadline to file third-party discovery motions
through August 18. We would like to use that additional time to try to resolve the outstanding issues.

We appreciate Google's continued investigation. As previously discussed, we sent you a proposed
declaration that we believe could provide a basis to resolve the subpoenas. Please send us any
proposed edits to the declaration as soon as possible so that we can evaluate whether the declaration,
as revised, would address the information sought by the subpoenas and avoid the need for additional
discovery. To that end, we would appreciate the opportunity to review any proposed revisions before the
declaration is finalized or executed.

Given the timing, we would appreciate receiving your edits promptly. If we are unable to reach a
resolution before the August 18 deadline, Neural AI will need to file a motion to preserve its rights and
avoid any argument that it waived the issue. That would not prevent the parties from continuing to work
toward a resolution. If we subsequently reach an agreement that resolves the outstanding discovery,
Neural AI would promptly withdraw the motion.

Regards,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK


From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Friday, August 7, 2026 at 9:22 AM
To: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Tanner,
Neural AI’s counsel suggested during our meet and confer that the requests to Google were reasonable
and directed to relevant evidence in view of Judge Gilland’s comments regarding the Dell
subpoena. Now Neural AI is saying that Google is “differently situated” than Dell. It is unclear why
Neural AI brought up Judge Gilliland’s comments if that is the case.
Thank you for confirming your agreement that a declaration would suffice to resolve Google’s obligations
under the subpoenas. We understand that you want to have some sense of what is in the declaration
beforehand. We can work with that in mind.


                                                        8


                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2     Filed 08/25/26   Page 10 of 17

Finally, on timing, Google’s ability to investigate these topics has been hampered by Neural AI’s
continued failure to narrow the scope of any of its overbroad requests. In addition, Neural AI only
provided its “questions” to Google on August 4. While Google continues to investigate these matters
diligently, we may not have an update by 4:00 pm CT on Monday. We will provide an update as soon as
we can next week.
Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 1:09 PM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com


Counsel,

Dell was differently situated because it is principally a reseller of NVIDIA products. Google’s own
configurations and use of NVIDIA hardware and software are far more relevant to the infringement issues
in this case.

The subpoena served on Dell is attached. I assume the transcript you referenced is from the September
8, 2025 discovery conference before Judge Gilliland where NVIDIA stated at the hearing that NAI must
seek discovery from NVIDIA’s customers to understand how NVIDIA’s source code is configured and
used. That hearing was sealed, so we cannot provide the actual transcript.

We appreciate that Google is investigating the topics addressed in the proposed declaration. We are
willing to accept an appropriately complete declaration in lieu of document production and a deposition,
but we cannot agree in advance that any declaration Google elects to provide—regardless of its scope or
contents—will necessarily satisfy all of Google’s obligations under the subpoenas. Once Google
provides its proposed edits to the declaration I shared we can promptly assess whether it adequately
addresses the relevant issues and eliminates the need for further discovery.

Given the August 11 fact-discovery deadline, however, an update sometime next week is insufficient.
Please provide Google’s proposed declaration, or at minimum a substantive update identifying what
Google is prepared to address by 4:00 pm CT on Monday so the parties can determine whether motion
practice can be avoided.
                                                                  9


                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2      Filed 08/25/26   Page 11 of 17


Regards,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK


From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Thursday, August 6, 2026 at 9:03 AM
To: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>;
Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Tanner,
Non-Party Google provided its objections on July 21, 2026. Those objections explained, among other
things, how the subpoena requests and topics were overbroad, unduly burdensome and not proportional
to the needs of the case. As things currently stand, Neural AI has not narrowed the scope of any of its
requests. Instead, Neural AI has provided a “template” declaration and, yesterday August 4, provided
additional “questions.” These documents are similarly overbroad and unduly burdensome for a third
party.
We also discussed on the last meet and confer providing a transcript from the hearing with Judge
Gilliland and the subpoena to Dell. We have not received that, but instead noticed that Judge Gilliland
issued an order yesterday rejected many of Neural AI’s overbroad requests to Dell.
Despite this, Google is investigating the topics covered in the “template” declaration. Google may be
able to provide a declaration within a more reasonable scope. Any declaration would be subject to an
agreement that such a declaration satisfies all of Google’s obligations under the subpoenas. That
includes that Google will not be required to sit for a deposition. Please confirm.
We expect to have an update on the investigation next week. Given the above, we do not believe a
motion to compel would be a productive use of resources.
We’re available to meet and confer further if helpful.
Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 11:27 AM

                                                                  10


              Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS            Document 7-2   Filed 08/25/26   Page 12 of 17
To: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com;
Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo,
Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate) <jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>;
Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com


Counsel,

I am following up on this thread.

Despite the parties’ prior meet-and-confers, document discovery in the underlying action closes on
August 11. Unless the parties can promptly reach a resolution, that deadline leaves Neural AI no
practical alternative but to move to compel by the end of this week or, at the latest, August 10, to
preserve its rights.

To reduce burden and potentially avoid motion practice, I am attaching a set of questions intended to
guide your investigation and help identify the responsive information, and also recirculating the draft
declaration we previously shared, and that Google may revise to ensure its accuracy.

If Google commits to provide an executed declaration, Neural AI is willing to consider accepting the
declaration in lieu of further document production and/or deposition testimony, subject to resolving any
material gaps. Otherwise, the discovery deadline will force Neural AI to move to compel by or before
August 10 to preserve its rights. Even if a motion becomes necessary, we remain open to resolving the
issues promptly and mooting or withdrawing the motion through compliance.

We are available this week to further meet and confer as necessary.

Regards,

Tanner Laiche
Susman Godfrey LLP
206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com
401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101
HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK


From: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2026 at 4:29 PM
To: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
                                                       11


                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS                Document 7-2      Filed 08/25/26      Page 13 of 17

<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
Jordan,

Please see attached template. Could we talk at 9:30 instead? I have another meeting at 10 now.

Thanks very much.

--
Rocco F. Magni
Partner | Susman Godfrey LLP
Office: 713.653.7861
Cell: 512.514.3519
Firm Bio
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this message in error, please notify the
sender and delete it immediately.
From: Jaffe, Jordan <jjaffe@wsgr.com>
Date: Monday, July 27, 2026 at 2:42 PM
To: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian
Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>;
Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>;
max@ciccarellilawfirm.com <max@ciccarellilawfirm.com>; Tamar Lusztig
<TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund
<msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel
<sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Wang, Jing (SF Associate)
<jing.wang@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>;
Davidson, Nancy Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: RE: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)
EXTERNAL Email
Rocco et al.,

Thanks for speaking with us last Friday. As discussed, we are waiting on you all to send over a list of
questions for our client and/or template declaration for us to review. We will plan to reconvene Friday at
10AM PT to discuss further.

Best regards,


Jordan R. Jaffe | Partner | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300 | San Francisco, CA 94105
415.498.0556 | jjaffe@wsgr.com | LinkedIn


From: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2026 4:18 AM
To: Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>
                                                                  12


             Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS        Document 7-2      Filed 08/25/26     Page 14 of 17
Cc: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>; Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton
<BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; Tanner Laiche
<TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>; max@ciccarellilawfirm.com; Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily
Portuguese <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund <msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Jaffe, Jordan
<jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>; Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben
<bmargo@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy
Fronda- <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)

EXT - rmagni@susmangodfrey.com


That works. Thanks.
--
Rocco F. Magni
Partner | Susman Godfrey LLP
Office: 713.653.7861
Cell: 512.514.3519

Firm Bio

This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete it immediately.


       On Jul 21, 2026, at 11:54 PM, Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com> wrote:

       EXTERNAL Email
       Rocco,

       How about Friday at 11 am PT?

       Neil Desai | Wilson Sonsini
       T 323.210.2912 | ndesai@wsgr.com

       From: Rocco Magni <RMagni@susmangodfrey.com>
       Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 2:15 PM
       To: McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>
       Cc: Max Tribble <MTRIBBLE@SusmanGodfrey.com>; Brian Melton <BMelton@SusmanGodfrey.com>;
       Samuel Drezdzon <SDrezdzon@susmangodfrey.com>; Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com>;
       max@ciccarellilawfirm.com; Tamar Lusztig <TLusztig@susmangodfrey.com>; Emily Portuguese
       <EPortuguese@susmangodfrey.com>; msiegmund <msiegmund@cjsjlaw.com>; Jaffe, Jordan
       <jjaffe@wsgr.com>; Desai, Neil <ndesai@wsgr.com>; Grubbs, Deborah <DGrubbs@wsgr.com>;
       Browder, Sissel <sbrowder@wsgr.com>; Margo, Ben <bmargo@wsgr.com>; Pierce, Naomi
       <npierce@wsgr.com>; Arenas, G. Grace <garenas@wsgr.com>; Davidson, Nancy Fronda-
       <ndavidson@wsgr.com>
       Subject: Re: Neural AI, LLC v. Nvidia Corporation (C.A. 7:24-cv-00221-ADA-DTG)


                                                    13


                                                                                                Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS       Document 7-2       Filed 08/25/26     Page 15 of 17

                                                         EXT - rmagni@susmangodfrey.com


                                                         Please provide times Friday to meet and confer. Thanks.
                                                         --
                                                         Rocco F. Magni
                                                         Partner | Susman Godfrey LLP
                                                         Office: 713.653.7861
                                                         Cell: 512.514.3519

                                                         Firm Bio

                                                         This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this
                                                         message in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately.


                                                                                                On Jul 21, 2026, at 5:13 PM, McKone, Mercedes <mmckone@wsgr.com>
                                                                                                wrote:

                                                                                                EXTERNAL Email
                                                                                                Counsel:

                                                                                                Please see the attached for electronic service.

                                                                                                Thank you.


<image001.png>
Mercedes N. McKone | Executive Assistant | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
12235 El Camino Real | San Diego, CA 92130 | direct: 858.350.2217 | mmckone@wsgr.com
<image 002.png >                      <image 004.png >    <image 005.png >   <image 006.png >


                   <image 003.png >


                                                                                                This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential,
                                                                                                and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review,
                                                                                                copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is
                                                                                                strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
                                                                                                sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of
                                                                                                this email and any attachments thereto.
                                                                                                <2026-07-21 Responses and Objections to Deposition Subpoena.pdf>
                                                                                                <2026-07-21 Responses and Objections to Document Subpoena.pdf>


                                                         This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged
                                                         material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of
                                                         this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the


                                                                                                                                       14


             Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS        Document 7-2       Filed 08/25/26    Page 16 of 17

       intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the
       original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the
sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
                                                     15


             Case 7:26-mc-00324-LS         Document 7-2       Filed 08/25/26     Page 17 of 17

thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.


                                                      16