Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 250

Declaration of Sean P. DeBruine in Support of 249 MOTION to Compel Apple, Inc. to Produce Testing Tool (Public Version) filed byElan Microelectronics Corporation. (Related document(s) 249 ) (DeBruine, Sean) (Filed on 6/7/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 YITAI HU (SBN 248085) yitai.hu@alston.com SEAN P. DEBRUINE (SBN 168071) sean.debruine@alston.com ELIZABETH H. RADER (SBN 184963) elizabeth.rader@alston.com JANE HAN BU (SBN 240081) jane.bu@alston.com JENNIFER LIU (SBN 268990) celine.liu@alston.com PALANI P. RATHINASAMY (SBN 269852) palani.rathinasamy@alston.com ALSTON & BIRD LLP 275 Middlefield Road, Suite 150 Menlo Park, CA 94025-4008 Telephone: 650-838-2000 Facsimile: 650-838-2001 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant ELAN MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 SAN FRANCISO DIVISION 16 17 18 21 22 DECLARATION OF SEAN P. DEBRUINE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF ELAN MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION’S MOTION TO COMPEL APPLE, INC. TO PRODUCE TESTING TOOL Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, 19 20 Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PSG) ELAN MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION, v. APPLE, INC., Defendant and Counterplaintiff. [PUBLIC VERSION] 23 24 AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 25 26 27 28 DECL. OF SEAN P. DEBRUINE ISO ELAN’S MOT. TO COMPEL TESTING TOOL 1 Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PSG) 1 I, Sean P. DeBruine, declare as follows: 2 1. I am a partner in the law firm of Alston & Bird LLP, counsel to Plaintiff Elan 3 Microelectronics Corporation (“Elan”) in this action. I have personal knowledge of the following 4 facts and, if called to testify, I could and would testify competently to the matters stated herein. 5 2. On May 11, 2011 I visited the offices of Weil, Gotshal and Manges, LLP in 6 Redwood Shores, California. Palani Rathinasamy, also an attorney at Alston & Bird, joined me in 7 that visit. While there we were permitted to inspect and use an Apple Macbook Pro laptop 8 computer running Apple’s internal . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 3. 17 When I asked 18 19 whether the tool could be used to test those other products, the Weil representative supervising our 20 inspection admitted that the laptop was the only version that was available, that he had never seen 21 a version for the iOS products and did not believe that any such version was requested from Apple. 22 I asked that versions for those other products be produced, and he stated that he would look into it. 23 4. for iOS products, I instructed Mr. Rathinasamy to follow up. Mr. Rathinasamy sent an 24 25 26 The following week, having heard nothing from Apple about the email to Derek Walter on May 18, 2011 and I was copied on that email. 5. When Apple responded the following week stating that it was still unable to 27 produce the tool for iOS products and refusing to allow Elan’s expert to make even an initial 28 inspection of the laptop running that tool, I requested, and the Court granted, an expedited DECL. OF SEAN P. DEBRUINE ISO ELAN’S MOT. TO COMPEL TESTING TOOL 2 Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PSG) 1 telephonic conference on this dispute. During that telephonic conference on May 24, 2011 Jared 2 Bobrow, counsel for Apple, represented to the Court that Elan had never specifically asked to 3 inspect the 4 Court, that Apple could not make the 5 the following day, even if ordered by the Court. Only when I explained that counsel had in its 6 possession the laptop running the 7 been able make that version of the tool available the following day. 8 9 10 for the iOS products. Mr. Bobrow also represented, when asked by the “fully available” for inspection did Mr. Bobrow agree that counsel would have I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 27th day of May, 2011 at Menlo Park, California. 11 12 13 14 /s/ Sean P. DeBruine Sean P. DeBruine 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECL. OF SEAN P. DEBRUINE ISO ELAN’S MOT. TO COMPEL TESTING TOOL 3 Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PSG)

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?