Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 154

Declaration of Jay Hamlin in Support of 152 Memorandum in Opposition to Elan's Motion to Exclusive Documents, or, in the Alternative, for Costs filed byApple, Inc.. (Related document(s) 152 ) (Lumish, Douglas) (Filed on 8/3/2010)

Download PDF
Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc. Doc. 154 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATTHEW D. POWERS (Bar No. 104795) matthew.powers@weil.com JARED BOBROW (Bar No. 133712) jared.bobrow@weil.com DOUGLAS E. LUMISH (Bar No. 183863) doug.lumish@weil.com SONAL N. MEHTA (Bar No. 222086) sonal.mehta@weil.com DEREK C. WALTER (Bar. No. 246322) derek.walter@weil.com NATHAN GREENBLATT (Bar No. 262279) nathan.greenblatt@weil.com WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Silicon Valley Office 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Telephone: (650) 802-3000 Facsimile: (650) 802-3100 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff Apple Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ELAN MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. APPLE INC., Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff. Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PVT) DECLARATION OF JAY HAMLIN IN SUPPORT OF APPLE'S OPPOSITION TO ELAN'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE DOCUMENTS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR COSTS Hon. Patricia V. Trumbull DECLARATION OF JAY HAMLIN ISO OPP TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE DOCUMENTS Case No. C 09 01531 RS (PVT) Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I, Jay Hamlin, declare: I am an employee with Apple Inc. in Cupertino, California. I submit this declaration based on personal knowledge and following a reasonable investigation. If called upon as a witness, I could competently testify to the truth of each statement herein. 1. On February 19, 2010, I met in-person with outside counsel for Apple and an Apple in-house legal specialist to discuss my possible knowledge regarding this litigation and another litigation involving Apple products. The topic of documents in my possession, custody and control was raised in that meeting. At that time, I did not believe I had many, if any, such documents. Because I had worked on the inventions that led to the `218 patent as a consultant (and later worked on the patent application as an employee) of Apple but had subsequently left Apple for six years to form my own company, I believed I would not have had relevant files when I returned to Apple years later and thus would not have documents relevant to the `218 patent. However, I worked to identify and provide any documents that I recalled that might be relevant to either litigation. I did not recall having any relevant documents in my personal possession, custody or control at the time. 2. On June 14, 2010, I met with outside and in-house counsel again to prepare for my deposition. In that meeting, the topic of documents in my possession, custody or control was raised again. In the course of that meeting or on my way home that night, I recalled that there was one location my barn where I might have personal records that I could check to see if I had documents from the 1993-1994 time period when I was a consultant to Apple. I had not looked at any materials in that location in many (more than a dozen) years and did not expect to find relevant documents. Nonetheless, that night, I searched my personal archives stored in my barn, and realized that I did have possession of documents relevant to the case. In addition to a folder of hardcopy documents, I also found CD-ROMs and hard disk drives with archived computer files related to the touchpad work I did for Apple. I provided a number of those files to counsel the next morning and the hard disk drives the following day. 3. On June 15, 2010, I arrived at the Palo Alto offices of Elan's attorneys with Apple's counsel. I was prepared to sit for deposition that day. DECLARATION OF JAY HAMLIN ISO OPP TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE DOCUMENTS 1 Case No. C 09 01531 RS (PVT)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?