Plaintiff Valeo Schalter und Sensoren GmbH (“Valeo” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendant NVIDIA Corporation (“NVIDIA” or “Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”) have conferred and respectfully submit this Joint Forensic Protocol Stipulation. The Parties intend to analyze the contents of three devices in the custody of German authorities because they may contain evidence relevant to the Parties’ claims and defenses in Valeo Schalter und Sensoren GmbH v. NVIDIA Corp., Case No. 5:23- cv-05721-PCP (N.D. Cal.) (the “Litigation”). Two of the three devices, one laptop and one desktop computer, were computers issued to Mohammad Moniruzzaman by NVIDIA while he worked at NVIDIA (collectively, the “NVIDIA Computers”). The third device used to be Mr. Moniruzzaman’s personal computer (the “Personal Computer”). These three devices were seized by the German prosecutor at the time of Mr. Moniruzzaman’s arrest.

Pursuant to this Joint Forensic Protocol Stipulation, the parties hereby agree to the following protocol for receiving and inspecting the contents of the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer:

1. The parties agree to consent that the German authorities shall turn over the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer to an independent, third-party neutral knowledgeable and experienced in computer forensics to conduct an inspection (the “Neutral”). The Parties will jointly share the costs of the Neutral as well as the Neutral’s work, with NVIDIA and Valeo each incurring 50% of the costs. The Neutral shall be required to preserve the contents of the computers.

2. The Neutral will inform the Parties of available forensic artifacts, metadata, and any other information that may assist a computer forensic expert in analyzing how the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer may have been used by Mr. Moniruzzaman (collectively “Computer Forensic Evidence”). The Neutral shall extract, export, or otherwise provide to the Parties, at either Party’s request, true and correct copies of any available Computer Forensic Evidence. The Neutral shall take care to provide the Computer Forensic Evidence to the Parties without modifying the underlying evidence located on the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer.

3. The Neutral shall also create forensic images of the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer (the “Images”). The Images shall be maintained by, and remain in the possession of, the Neutral. At either Party’s request, the Images shall be made available for inspection, at a location convenient to the Neutral and the requesting Party, by consultants or expert witnesses of the requesting Party who are permitted to review documents designated as “Highly Confidential – Source Code” under the operative protective order (currently found at docket entry 87 on the Court’s electronic docket). Such inspections shall be arranged at least one week in advance, and shall be limited to a maximum of seven (7) hours per day. During such inspections, the consultants or expert witnesses may review forensic artifacts, metadata, and similar information on the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer, but may not open any files located on the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer.

4. The Neutral will also inform the parties of any available analysis or reports that the Neutral is capable of preparing, and will prepare forensic reports (including but not limited to “Red Flag Reports”) as requested by one or both of the Parties. These reports will be provided to both Parties as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEY EYES ONLY” documents under the Protective Order entered at Dkt. 87 in the Litigation. The Parties may make reasonable follow-up requests for additional reports and analyses as necessary.

5. The Neutral shall also promptly export all source code located on the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer which was downloaded or copied from any Valeo repository and shall provide the Valeo Code to counsel for Valeo. For the purposes of this stipulation, code shall be considered “Valeo Code” if it has the same filename as Valeo code produced in this litigation, if it is cited in, incorporated into, or referenced in, any version of Valeo’s Section 2019.210 identification of trade secrets, or if it contains copyright notices, metadata, or other header information indicating it originated at Valeo. A list of filenames and directories of this code will be promptly provided to NVIDIA by Valeo. The parties will meet and confer about the relevance of any Valeo Code produced from the computer, and counsel for Valeo shall then make relevant Valeo Code available for inspection in a manner consistent with Paragraph 9 of the operative protective order.

6. The Neutral shall also promptly export all source code located on the NVIDIA Computers and Personal Computer which was downloaded or copied from any NVIDIA repository and shall provide the NVIDIA Code to counsel for NVIDIA. For the purposes of this stipulation, code shall be considered “NVIDIA Code” if it has the same filename as NVIDIA code produced in this litigation, if it contains copyright notices, metadata, or other header information indicating it originated at NVIDIA, or if it is included on a list of source code files and directories provided by NVIDIA to the Neutral. NVIDIA’s list of source code files and directories will not be shared with Valeo.

7. A list of filenames and directories of NVIDIA code meeting any of the following criteria will be promptly provided to Valeo by NVIDIA: (1) metadata indicates that the code was created, modified, edited, or otherwise altered by MM, unless the metadata shows the “creation” “edit,” or “modification” was nothing more than MM downloading files from NVIDIA’s Git repository in the first instance; (2) the code is found on MM’s devices in a location outside of NVIDIA’s git project directories; or (3) the code is found in a directory that includes NVIDIA code with file names that have been produced in this litigation. At minimum such directories referenced in (3) include the exemplary directories below, but may include additional directory structures depending on how NVIDIA organized its code when MM last downloaded it. The parties will meet and confer about the relevance of any NVIDIA Code produced from the computer, and counsel for NVIDIA shall make relevant NVIDIA Code available for inspection in a manner consistent with Paragraph 9 of the operative protective order.

[REDACTED]

8. The Neutral shall also identify all other source code (that it cannot identify as either NVIDIA or Valeo code) and shall make that code available for review by the parties consistent with Paragraph 3 above.

9. The Parties may also propose search term(s) or metadata parameters (e.g. date modified, date created, size) to search all files and non-NVIDIA.com emails other than system and source code files located on these computers. The Neutral shall then conduct the search pursuant to the search terms and parameters provided by the Parties. However, if either Party’s proposed search terms hit on more than 10,000 user-generated, non-source-code files, that Party shall be required to refine its proposed terms in order to reduce the total number of hits to 10,000 or fewer. The Parties may perform reasonable follow-up requests as necessary.

10. The results of the searches will initially be provided to NVIDIA. NVIDIA may conduct a privilege review and responsiveness review to identify files it contends should be withheld from production. Files may be withheld for non-responsiveness if they are not relevant, meaning the files are not “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.” In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig., 2023 WL 5667880, at *2 (N.D. Cal. July 6, 2023). Within 15 days of receiving those files, NVIDIA will identify the non-privileged, responsive files in the results and direct the Neutral to produce those documents to Valeo.

11. Within 30 days after receiving those files, NVIDIA will prepare a log identifying all files withheld from production pursuant to paragraphs 7 and 10. The log shall set forth the privilege or protection relied upon and specify separately for each file:

(b) Bates number range or unique document identifier; family relationships; description of the document, including the factual basis sufficient to support the claim that the document is being withheld; the file name and file path of the document; the names of the author(s); for emails or correspondence, the names of all addressees and recipients, including copyees and blind copyees; the document date; an identification of whether the document has been produced in redacted form or withheld in its entirety; and the basis for withholding designation (attorney client privilege, attorney work product, or responsiveness).

12. All files that are not system or source code files that hit on keyword searches but are withheld must be identified in that log, including files withheld for non-responsiveness. The Neutral will confirm the completeness of the log and ensure that all files responsive to either party’s searches have either been produced or logged.

13. The Parties agree that Section 13 of the Protective Order, allowing for clawback of inadvertently produced privileged documents, will apply to documents produced subject to this protocol.

14. In the event that Valeo claws back, or otherwise causes to be withheld from production or investigation, any files found on the NVIDIA Computers or Personal Computer, Valeo must create a log of said files that meets all of the requirements described in Paragraphs 10 and 10.a of this protocol.

15. All source code files provided by the Neutral shall be designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – SOURCE CODE” under the Protective Order entered at Dkt. 87 in the Litigation. All other files and documents, including forensic artifacts, metadata, and forensic reports, will be produced to both parties as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEY EYES ONLY” documents under the Protective Order entered at Dkt. 87 in the Litigation. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 7, 2024