Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
1041
Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Apple Inc.'s Opposition to Samsung's Motion to Enforce April 12, 2012 Order filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Erica Tierney in Support of Admin. Motion to Seal, #2 Proposed Order Granting Motion to Seal, #3 Apple's Opposition to Samsung's Motion to Enforce April 12, 2012 Order, #4 Proposed Order Denying Samsung's Motion, #5 Declaration of Mia Mazza in Support of Apple's Opposition, #6 Exhibit 1, #7 Exhibit 2, #8 Exhibit 3, #9 Exhibit 4, #10 Exhibit 5, #11 Exhibit 6, #12 Exhibit 7)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 6/5/2012) Modified on 6/6/2012 pursuant to General Order No. 62, attachment #1 sealed (dhm, COURT STAFF).
DECLARATION OF MIA MAZZA IN SUPPORT
OF APPLE’S OPPOSITIONS TO SAMSUNG’S
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION TO
ENFORCE
EXHIBIT 1
PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781)
hmcelhinny@mofo.com
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)
mjacobs@mofo.com
RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425)
rhung@mofo.com
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: (415) 268-7000
Facsimile: (415) 268-7522
7
8
9
10
11
WILLIAM F. LEE (pro hac vice)
william.lee@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
60 State Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
Telephone: (617) 526-6000
Facsimile: (617) 526-5000
MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180)
mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
950 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 858-6000
Facsimile: (650) 858-6100
Attorneys for Plaintiff and
Counterclaim-Defendant Apple Inc.
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
14
15
16
APPLE INC., a California corporation,
17
Plaintiff,
18
19
20
21
22
23
Civil Action No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
vs.
APPLE INC.’S OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S SECOND
SET OF INTERROGATORIES
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity, SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation, and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE
PROTECTIVE ORDER
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
1
APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity, SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation, and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, a
California corporation,
5
Counterclaim-Plaintiffs,
6
7
8
9
v.
APPLE INC., a California corporation,
Counterclaim-Defendant.
10
11
12
PLAINTIFF AND COUNTERCLAIM-DEFENDANT APPLE INC.’S
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 19-32)
13
14
15
16
Under Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 33, Apple
Inc. (“Apple”) hereby objects and responds to the Second Set of Interrogatories to Apple Inc.
(Nos. 19-32) served by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and
17
Samsung Telecommunications America LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) on September 16, 2011.
18
19
These responses are based on information reasonably available to Apple at the present time.
20
Apple reserves the right to amend and supplement these responses when and if additional
21
information becomes available.
22
23
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Apple makes the following general responses and objections (“General Objections”) to
24
25
26
each definition, instruction, and interrogatory propounded in Samsung’s Second Set of
Interrogatories to Apple Inc. These General Objections are hereby incorporated into each
27
28
2
APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES
Subject to the foregoing qualifications and General Objections and the specific objections
made below, Apple objects and responds to Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.’s Second Set of
4
Interrogatories to Apple Inc. as follows:
5
6
7
Interrogatory No. 19
Separately for each APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCT, IDENTIFY: (1) the Baseband
8
Processor used; (2) the Executable Software incorporated or installed in the APPLE ACCUSED
9
PRODUCT; (2) the 3 GPP Release(s) supported (including which versions and subversions of
10
the 3GPP specification are supported within each Release); (3) the version(s) of HSUPA
11
12
supported; and (4) the version(s) of HSDPA supported, and IDENTIFY any documents which
13
reflect these categories of information.
14
Response to Interrogatory No. 19
15
Apple objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad, unduly
16
burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,
17
especially to the extent it seeks information about the accused Apple products beyond the
18
19
components, functionalities, or technologies of those products that may be relevant to Samsung’s
20
patents-in-suit, and/or that Samsung has placed at issue in this case in its Patent Rule 3-1
21
Disclosures. Accordingly, in responding to this interrogatory, Apple is not providing
22
information about versions of the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 3G that are not compatible with the 3GPP
23
UMTS standard, as those are outside the scope of Samsung’s infringement contentions. Apple
24
objects that the phrase “Executable Software incorporated or installed” is vague, overbroad, and
25
26
not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this
27
28
9
APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
Interrogatory as it contains subparts that each should count as a separate Interrogatory. Apple
2
objects to the phrases “supported” and “which reflect these categories” as vague and ambiguous.
3
Apple also objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is subject to
4
a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement or governed by a protective order preventing its
5
6
production, or otherwise seeks confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information of third
7
parties. Apple further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it requires information outside
8
Apple’s possession, custody, and control, including, for example, information concerning
9
components that Apple has purchased from third parties.
10
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple
11
12
responds that in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d), Apple has produced
13
and/or will produce documents responsive to this Interrogatory, and that the burden of
14
ascertaining the answer to this Interrogatory from the produced business records is substantially
15
the same for Apple as for Samsung. Apple further designates, at this time, the following
16
documents from which information responsive to this Interrogatory may be ascertained, which
17
Apple has produced to Samsung in the matter captioned In the Matter of Certain Electronic
18
19
20
21
22
23
Devices, Including Wireless Communications Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing
Devices, and Tablet Computers, Inv. No. 337-TA-794:
Apple iPhone related documents: APL7940001420081 - APL7940001420106,
APL7940001420107 - APL7940001420270, APL7940001420271 - APL7940001420363,
APL7940001420364 - APL7940001420418, APL7940001420419 - APL7940001420468,
24
APL7940001420469 - APL7940001420529, APL7940001420530 - APL7940001420761, and
25
26
APL7940001420762 - APL794000142941.
27
28
10
APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)
SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Apple iPad related documents: APL7940001420942 - APL7940001421023,
1
2
APL7940001421024 - APL7940001421103, and APL7940001421104 - APL7940001421202.
3
Apple further responds that at least the following baseband chips are included in the
4
Accused Products in the United States:
5
7
8
9
Baseband Chip
Product
6
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
10
11
12
iPhone 4 AT&T
iPad 1
13
iPad 1 3G
14
iPad 2
15
iPad 2 3G AT&T
16
17
18
19
Interrogatory No. 20
Separately for each APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCT and each Baseband Processor,
IDENTIFY the Software or portions of Software (including corresponding file name and line
20
21
numbers) for performing multiplexing, channel coding, interleaving, demultiplexing of radio
22
frames, generating scrambling codes and/or rate matching, or state which of these functions are
23
not performed by the APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCT or Baseband Processor.
24
Response to Interrogatory No. 20
25
Apple objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad, unduly
26
burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
27
28
11
APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)
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?