Aristocrat and Light & Wonder locked horns in court filings over the scope of document disclosure as part of the ongoing Dragon Train litigation.
Aristocrat and Light & Wonder locked horns in court filings over the scope of document disclosure as part of the ongoing Dragon Train litigation.
In a newly filed stipulation submitted Tuesday (8 April), Aristocrat accused Light & Wonder of stonewalling key discovery requests aimed at uncovering the alleged misuse of its confidential game design information.
Aristocrat argues its competitor is using procedural tactics to conceal the extent of its misappropriation, while Light & Wonder insists it is complying with discovery rules and that the Sydney-based business is seeking “unnecessary and duplicative” disclosures.
Central to the dispute are communications involving former Aristocrat employee Emma Charles, who previously worked at Light & Wonder and is alleged to have played a pivotal role in the creation of Dragon Train.
Dragon Train case hits Light & Wonder share price
Light & Wonder has seen significant share price hits due to the case, including a 20% dive after it was ordered to replace all Dragon Train units in the US.
However, the Las Vegas-based provider notched a win in a parallel case happening in Australia, after the court refused to grant a similar injunction.
At the end of March, Light & Wonder saw additional share price disruption resulting from an amended Aristocrat complaint which said several other games could be at issue.
In a statement and call with investors earlier in the month, Light & Wonder addressed the issue and said it would be pulling its Jewel of the Dragon game to reduce uncertainty.
The latest filing outlines that Aristocrat is demanding broader access to internal emails and documents to determine whether its proprietary mathematical models and design features were also used in the development of other games by the US gaming supplier.
The Australian slots giant argued Charles may have shared sensitive information beyond her own studio, raising red flags about potential widespread misuse.
Aristocrat’s attorneys said: “A year into this intellectual property action, the record is clear that L&W used Aristocrat’s confidential information to develop its now-enjoined Dragon Train games. But L&W’s misappropriation did not end with Dragon Train.
“In light of this evidence — and L&W’s failure to disclose key evidence when it was required to do so — a critical aspect of discovery is to determine the extent to which Aristocrat’s confidential information has been disseminated within and used by L&W.
“The discovery requests in dispute are targeted to that purpose, and L&W should be required to respond in full.”
Light & Wonder, however, claimed that Aristocrat is overreaching.
L&W says Aristocrat reneging on previous agreed protocols
While acknowledging that some materials have been and will continue to be produced, the business said Aristocrat is trying to bypass agreed-upon protocols for electronically stored information (ESI).
According to Light & Wonder, Aristocrat is attempting to force burdensome manual reviews instead of using the 180 keyword searches allowed under the ESI agreement.
Another flashpoint involves the international reach of the alleged infringement.
Aristocrat wants data on how Light & Wonder commercialised its games globally, particularly in Australia, where the parallel lawsuit is pending.
The Matt Wilson-led business has refused to provide Australian data in the US case, arguing that such documents should be obtained through the Australian court system.
Despite numerous meet-and-confer sessions and months of correspondence, the parties remain at an impasse.