Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 1057

Declaration of Cyndi Wheeler in Support of #999 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal , #1007 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Samsung's Opposition to Apple's Motion for Summary Judgment and Documents in Support Thereto , Samsung's Oppotiion to Apple's Motion to Strike, and Samsung's Opposition to Motion to Exclude filed byApple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J, #12 Exhibit K)(Related document(s) #999 , #1007 ) (Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 6/7/2012)

Exhibit I

EXHIBIT 20
FILED UNDER SEAL

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781)
[e-mail]
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)
[e-mail]
RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7
8
9
10
11

WILLIAM F. LEE (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
60 State Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180)
[e-mail]
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
950 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
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.
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,

APPLE INC.’S OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S FOURTH
SET OF INTERROGATORIES
CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE
PROTECTIVE ORDER

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
1

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

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,
Counterclaim-Plaintiff,

7
8
9
10

v.
APPLE INC., a California corporation,
Counterclaim-Defendant.

11
12
13
14

PLAINTIFF AND COUNTERCLAIM-DEFENDANT APPLE INC.’S
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 34-80)
Under Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 33, Apple

15

Inc. (“Apple”) hereby objects and responds to the Fourth Set of Interrogatories to Apple Inc.

16

(Nos. 34-80) served by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and

17

Samsung Telecommunications America LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) on February 8, 2012.

18

These responses are based on information reasonably available to Apple at the present time.

19

Apple reserves the right to amend and supplement these responses when and if additional

20

information becomes available.

21
22
23
24
25
26

GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Apple makes the following general responses and objections (“General Objections”) to
each definition, instruction, and interrogatory propounded in Samsung’s Fourth Set of
Interrogatories to Apple Inc. These General Objections are hereby incorporated into each
specific response. The assertion of the same, similar, or additional objections or partial responses
to individual interrogatories does not waive any of Apple’s General Objections.

27
28
2

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

1.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definitions of “APPLE,” “PLAINTIFF,” “YOU,” and

“YOUR” to the extent they purport to include persons or entities that are separate and distinct
from Apple and are not under Apple’s control. “Apple” refers only to Apple Inc.
2.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definitions of each term incorporating the word

“PATENT,” “PATENTS,” and “PATENTS-IN-SUIT,” including definitions 4 through 16,
because they are inaccurate, overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome.

7
3.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definition of “APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS” to

8
the extent it is overly broad and unduly burdensome and to the extent it seeks information that is
9
neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

further objects to Samsung’s definition of “Apple Accused Products” to the extent that it requires
a legal conclusion. For purposes of responding to these Requests, Apple interprets the term
“Apple Accused Products” to mean those products that are specifically identified and accused in
Samsung’s Patent Local Rule 3-1 Infringement Contentions, served on September 7, 2011.
4.

Apple objects to the definition of “APPLE MANUFACTURERS” to the extent it

includes entities who have no role in the manufacture of the Apple Accused Products. Apple
further objects that this definition as overbroad to the extent it includes “all their predecessors,
successors, parents, divisions, subsidiaries, and affiliates thereof, and all officers, agents, employees,

19

counsel and other persons acting on their behalf, or any other person or entity subject to their control

20

or which controls them.”

21

5.

Apple objects to the definition of the term “3GPP” as vague, ambiguous,

22

overbroad, and unduly burdensome to the extent it departs from Apple’s own definition of this

23

term, as defined in Apple’s Third Set of Requests for Production of Documents.

24

6.

Apple objects to the definition of “Software” and “Related Documentation” as

25

overbroad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome, especially with regards to the terms

26

“acted upon by a processor,” “listings,” and “descriptive or explanatory documentary

27

documents.” Apple further objects because much of the “source code, hardware code, machine

28
3

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

code, object code, assembly code” or other “code” for hardware provided by third parties is not
within Apple’s possession, custody, or control.
7.

Apple objects to the definition of “Baseband Processor” because it is inaccurate,

overbroad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome, especially with regards to the phrase
“mainly used to process communication functions.”
8.

Apple objects to the definition of the term “FRAND” as vague and ambiguous to

7
the extent it departs from Apple’s own definition of this term, as defined in Apple’s Ninth Set of
8
Requests for Admission.
9
9.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definitions of “APPLE TRADE DRESS” because it

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

is inaccurate, overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome. For the purposes of
these responses and objections, Apple uses the following defined terms:
x “Original iPhone Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product
designs: a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface
covering the front of the product; the appearance of a metallic bezel around the flat clear
surface; a display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface, substantial black
borders above and below the display screen and narrower black borders on either side of

18

the screen; when the device is on, a matrix of colorful square icons with evenly rounded

19

corners within the display screen; and when the device is on, a bottom dock of colorful

20

square icons with evenly rounded corners set off from the other icons on the display,

21

which does not change as other pages of the user interface are viewed;

22

x “iPhone 3G Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product designs:

23

a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface covering the

24

front of the product; the appearance of a metallic bezel around the flat clear surface; a

25

display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface, substantial black borders

26

above and below the display screen and narrower black borders on either side of the

27

screen; when the device is on, a row of small dots on the display screen; when the device

28
4

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

is on, a matrix of colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners within the display
screen; and when the device is on, a bottom dock of colorful square icons with evenly
rounded corners set off from the other icons on the display, which does not change as
other pages of the user interface are viewed;
x “iPhone 4 Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product designs: a
rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface covering the

7
front of the product; a display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface,
8
substantial neutral (black or white) borders above and below the display screen and
9
narrower black borders on either side of the screen; a thin metallic band around the
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

outside edge of the phone; when the device is on, a row of small dots on the display
screen; when the device is on, a matrix of colorful square icons with evenly rounded
corners within the display screen; and when the device is on, a bottom dock of colorful
square icons with evenly rounded corners set off from the other icons on the display,
which does not change as other pages of the user interface are viewed;
x “iPhone Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product designs: a
rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface covering the

18

front of the product; a display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface,

19

substantial neutral (black or white) borders above and below the display screen and

20

narrower neutral borders on either side of the screen; when the device is on, a matrix of

21

colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners within the display screen; and when

22

the device is on, a bottom dock of colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners set

23

off from the other icons on the display, which does not change as other pages of the user

24

interface are viewed;

25

x “iPad Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product designs: a

26

rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface covering the

27

front of the product; the appearance of a metallic rim around the flat clear surface; a

28
5

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface, substantial neutral (black
or white) borders on all sides of the display screen; and when the device is on, a matrix of
colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners within the display screen;
x “iPad 2 Trade Dress” means the following elements of Apple’s product designs: a
rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; a flat clear surface covering the
front of the product; the appearance of a metallic rim around the clear flat surface; a

7
display screen under the clear surface; under the clear surface, substantial neutral (black
8
or white) borders on all sides of the display screen; and when the device is on, a matrix of
9
colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners within the display screen;
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

x “Trade Dress Registrations” means U.S. Registration Nos. 3,470,983; 3,457,218; and
3,475,327; and
x “Trade Dress Applications” means U.S. Application Serial Nos. 77/921,838;
77/921,829; 77/921,869; and 85/299,118.
10.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definitions of “APPLE TRADEMARKS” because it

is inaccurate, overly broad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome. For the purposes of
these responses and objections, Apple uses the following defined terms:

18

x

19

3,886,196; 3,889,642; 3,886,200; 3,889,685; 3,886,169; and 3,886,197;

20

x

21

No. 85/041,463; and

22

x

23

Registration No. 2,935,038.

24

11.

“Registered Icon Trademarks” means the marks shown in U.S. Registration Nos.

“Purple iTunes Store Trademark” means the mark shown in U.S. Application Serial

“iTunes Eighth Note and CD Design Trademark” means the mark shown in U.S.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definition of “Document” and “Documents” as overly

25

broad, vague, ambiguous, unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the

26

discovery of admissible evidence. “Document” shall have the meaning ascribed to it by Federal

27

Rule of Civil Procedure 34 and Federal Rule of Evidence 1001.

28
6

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

12.

Apple objects to the definition of the terms “referring to,” “relating to,”

“concerning,” or “regarding” as vague, ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome to the
extent that they depart from Apple’s own definitions of these terms, as defined in Apple’s Third
Set of Interrogatories, dated August 3, 2011.
13.

Apple objects to Samsung’s definition of “IDENTIFY” because it is overly broad

and unduly burdensome and because it purports to impose requirements and obligations on

7
Apple other than as set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Samsung’s definition is
8
overbroad and unduly burdensome because it would require Apple to include in its responses, for
9
example, the addresses, employer names, and job titles of every individual identified, regardless
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

of their employment at Apple; documents and testimony supporting every fact in Apple’s
responses; model names/numbers, manufacturers, announcement/release/sales dates, sellers, and
descriptions for any product identified in Apple’s responses, regardless of whether the product is
an Apple product; production numbers, document type, a description of the general nature and
subject matter, date of creation, and all authors, addressees, and recipients for every document;
and country, patent or application number, filing/publication/grant dates, patentees, and
applicants for every patent document.
14.

Apple objects to Samsung’s Instruction Nos. 1 and 2 because they are vague,

19

ambiguous, overly broad, and unduly burdensome, especially in their purported requirement that

20

Apple furnish information from entities that are not Apple, and from persons with “the best

21

knowledge.” Apple further objects to these instructions because they call for the disclosure of

22

information that is privileged and protected by the work product doctrine.

23

15.

Apple objects to Samsung’s Instruction Nos. 3 and 5-10 because they purport to

24

impose requirements and obligations on Apple other than as set forth in the Federal Rules of

25

Civil Procedure.

26

16.

27

Apple provides these objections and responses to the best of its current

knowledge. Discovery or further investigation may reveal additional or different information

28
7

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

warranting amendment of these objections and responses. Apple reserves the right to produce at
trial and make reference to any evidence, facts, documents, or information not discovered at this
time, omitted through good-faith error, mistake, or oversight, or the relevance of which Apple
has not presently identified.
17.

By responding to these interrogatories, Apple does not concede the relevance or

materiality of any of the interrogatories or of the subjects to which it refers. Apple’s responses

7
are made subject to, and without waiving any objections as to the competency, relevancy,
8
materiality, privilege, or admissibility of any of the responses, or of the subject matter to which
9
they concern, in any proceeding in this action or in any other proceeding.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

18.

Apple objects to any interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information that is

protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, the
joint defense or common interest privilege, or any other applicable privilege, doctrine, or
discovery immunity. The inadvertent production by Apple of information protected from
disclosure by any such privilege, doctrine, or immunity shall not be deemed a waiver by Apple
of such privileges or protections. Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, to the extent any
interrogatory calls for the identification of information dated after April 15, 2011 that is

18

protected by such privilege, doctrine, or immunity, such information will not be included on

19

Apple’s privilege log.

20

19.

Apple objects generally to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek confidential,

21

proprietary, or trade secret information of third parties. Apple will endeavor to work with third

22

parties in order to obtain their consent, if necessary, before providing such information. To the

23

extent an interrogatory seeks information of a confidential or proprietary nature to Apple, or to

24

others to whom Apple is under an obligation of confidentiality, Apple will respond pursuant to

25

the terms of the protective order to be entered in this case and subject to notice to third parties, as

26

necessary.

27
28
8

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

20.

Apple objects to any interrogatory to the extent it is premature and/or to the extent

that it: (a) conflicts with the schedule entered by the Court; (b) conflicts with obligations that are
imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules and/or the Patent Local
Rules of this Court, and/or any other applicable rule; (c) seeks information that is the subject of
expert testimony; (d) seeks information and/or responses that are dependent on the Court’s
construction of the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit; and/or (e) seeks information and/or

7
responses that are dependent on depositions and documents that have not been taken or
8
produced.
9
21.

Apple objects to each interrogatory as overbroad and unduly burdensome to the

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

extent that it calls for information that is neither relevant to the claims or defenses of the parties
nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
22.

Apple objects to each interrogatory and to Samsung’s “Definitions” and

“Instructions” to the extent they are vague, ambiguous, overbroad, or unduly burdensome, or
purport to impose upon Apple any duty or obligation that is inconsistent with or in excess of
those obligations that are imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules
and/or the Patent Local Rules of this Court, or any other applicable rule.
23.

Apple objects to any Interrogatory to the extent it seeks irrelevant information

19

about Apple’s products or business operations. Such requests are overbroad and unduly

20

burdensome. Apple will only produce information that is relevant to the patents-in-suit, or that is

21

otherwise related to the claims or defenses of the parties asserted by the parties in this litigation.

22

24.

Apple objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that it would impose a duty on

23

Apple to undertake a search for or an evaluation of information, documents, or things for which

24

Samsung is equally able to search for and evaluate. In particular, Apple objects to each

25

Interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information or documents that are publicly available.

26
27
28
9

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

25.

Apple objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information that can

be derived or ascertained from documents that will be produced in discovery or that are uniquely
in Samsung’s possession, custody, and control.
26.

Apple objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they would require Apple to

make a legal conclusion or contention to make a proper response.
27.

Apple objects to any Definition, Instruction, or Interrogatory to the extent that it

7
purports to require identification of oral communications. Such Definition, Instruction, or
8
Interrogatory is overbroad, vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome.
9
28.

Apple objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they purport to define words

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

or phrases to have a meaning different from their commonly understood meaning, or to include
more than their commonly understood definitions.
29.

In Apple’s objections, the terms “and” and “or” are intended to be construed

conjunctively or disjunctively as necessary to make the objections inclusive rather than
exclusive.
30.

Apple objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they purport to require Apple to

identify or describe or identify “every,” “each,” “any,” or other similarly expansive, infinite, or
all-inclusive terms to the extent that such Interrogatories are overbroad and unduly burdensome.
31.

Apple objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information that is not

20

in the possession, custody, or control of Apple, purport to require Apple to speculate about the

21

identity of persons who might have responsive documents, and/or purport to call for any

22

description of documents that Apple no longer possesses and/or was under no obligation to

23

maintain.

24

32.

25
26
27

Apple objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are not limited in time and

seek information for periods of time that are not relevant to any claim or defense.
33.

Apple’s objections as set forth herein are made without prejudice to Apple’s right

to assert any additional or supplemental objections pursuant to Rule 26(e).

28
10

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5

34.

Apple will make, and has made, reasonable efforts to respond to Samsung’s

Fourth Set of Interrogatories, to the extent that no objection is made, as Apple reasonably
understands and interprets each Interrogatory. If Samsung subsequently asserts any interpretation
of any Interrogatory that differs from the interpretation of Apple, then Apple reserves the right to
supplement and amend its objections and responses.

6
7
8
9

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 Fourth Set of

10

Interrogatories to Apple Inc. as follows:

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 34:

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 34
Apple objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly
burdensome, and seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence, including without limitation because it seeks information
relating to “all facts” and to the extent it seeks information relating to technologies or
functionality not at issue. Apple objects to the terms “advance notice” and “expected effects or
benefits of the transaction” as vague and ambiguous and failing to identify with sufficient

27
28
11

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6

INTERROGATORY NO. 72:
Separately for each SAMSUNG product that YOU contend infringes any APPLE
DESIGN PATENT, state fully and in detail on a patent-by-patent basis all facts supporting
YOUR contention of infringement, describe fully and in detail on a patent-by-patent basis where
each claimed element or feature of the patent is found on the accused SAMSUNG product and
provide a chart identifying fully and in detail on a patent-by-patent basis specifically where each

7
claimed element or feature is found on the accused SAMSUNG product.
8
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 72
9
Samsung directly infringes each asserted design patent (D’889, D’087, D’677, D’270,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

D’790, D’334, and D’305) by making, using, selling, and offering for sale within the United
States and importing into the United States devices that practice these patents, including the
Accused Products. Each design patent claims the overall designs depicted, and the claims in
these patents are presumptively valid.
No aspect of the designs in the asserted design patents is dictated by function. Thus, no
aspect of the designs should be factored out for purposes of determining whether Samsung’s
devices infringe the D’889, D’087, D’677, D’270, D’790, D’334, and D’305 Patents. A design

18

is not dictated solely by function when alternative designs are available. With respect to the

19

designs claimed in the asserted design patents, numerous alternative designs exist—some of

20

which were patented or commercially manufactured by Samsung itself and some of which were

21

patented or made by third parties.

22
23
24

The following is a representative sampling of alternative designs that are available for
each of the design patents at issue in this case.
Alternative designs with respect to the D’889 Patent include without limitation the

25

following patents and products:

26

x

Samsung Q1

27

x

Compaq TC1000

28
94

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

x

Sony Tablet S & P

2

x

Barnes & Noble Nook Tablet

3

x

Vinci Tablet

4

x

Acer Iconia Tab A500

x

Fusion Garage Grid 10

x

GriDPAD 2050

x

Motion Computing LS800

x

Droid XYBoard 8.2

5
6
7
8
9

Alternative designs with respect to the D’087, D’677, and D’270 Patents include without
10
11

limitation the following products:
x

Pantech Crossover

x

Sony Ericsson Xperia X10

x

Nokia N8

15

x

NEC N908

16

x

Nokia Lumia 800

17

x

Casio GZ One Commando

18

x

Sony Ericsson Xperia S

19

x

Modu phones and related jackets

20

x

Nokia X5-01

21

x

Samsung M7600 Beat DJ

12
13
14

22
23

Alternative designs with respect to the D’790, D’334, and D’305 Patents include without
limitation the following products:

24

x

Sony Ericsson Xperia X10

25

x

Nokia N8

26

x

Palm Centro

27

x

Palm Pixi Plus

28
95

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

x

Nokia Lumia 800

2

x

Palm Treo 700p

3

x

Pantech Hotshot CDM8992VW

4

x

Blackberry Torch 9850

x

Blackberry Storm 2

x

Samsung F700

5
6
7

Moreover, alternative cellular phone and tablet computer designs were explored during
8
the development process of Apple products and some were commercially manufactured by
9
Apple. These alternatives designs are contained in the native design files that have been
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

produced for inspection, in the printouts of these native files that have been produced to
Samsung, and in the numerous Apple mockups that have been produced for inspection. A
number of these alternative designs were identified in Christopher Stringer’s reply declaration in
support of Apple’s motion for preliminary injunction.
In determining whether an accused product infringes a design patent, courts must
compare the patented design as a whole to the accused products. Verbal descriptions of the
claimed designs are not required. As demonstrated in the following claim charts, the asserted

18

Apple designs are substantially the same in overall visual appearance as the corresponding

19

portion of each accused Samsung product.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
96

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

1.

The D’889 Patent

2
3
4

Each accused Samsung product incorporates a body and front face that is substantially
the same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’889 Patent.

5

a.

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

6

D’889 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
97

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’889 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

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
98

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

2.

The D’087 Patent2

2
Each accused Samsung product incorporates a front face and bezel that is substantially

3
4

the same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’087 Patent.
a.

5
6

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

2

In the charts that follow with respect to the D’087 patent, drawings that consist entirely of dotted lines are omitted.
Figures 5 through 8, respectively, are equivalent to figures 13 through 16; 21 through 24; 29 through 32; 37 through
40; and 45 through 48. Because the D’087 incorporates numerous alternative embodiments, only the relevant ones
are included.

28
99

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

b.

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
100

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

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
101

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2

c.

Samsung Infuse 4G

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Infuse 4G

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
102

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Infuse 4G

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

d.

Samsung Vibrant

9
D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Vibrant

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
103

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Vibrant

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

e.

Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
104

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch

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
105

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2

f.

Samsung Galaxy S II (AT&T)

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II (AT&T)

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
106

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II (AT&T)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

g.

Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
107

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

h.

Samsung Galaxy S II i9100

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II i9100

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
108

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II i9100

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
109

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’087 Patent Claim (Selected Embodiments)

Samsung Galaxy S II i9100

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
110

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

3.

The D’677 Patent3

2
Each accused Samsung product incorporates a front face that is substantially the same in

3
4

overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’677 Patent.
a.

5
6

Samsung Mesmerize (SCH-I500); Samsung Showcase i500

(SCH-I500); Samsung Showcase Galaxy S (SCH-I500) Samsung Fascinate (SCH-I500)

7

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung SCH-I500 (Mesmerize / Showcase
i500 / Showcase Galaxy S / Fascinate)

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

3

In the charts below with respect to the D’677 patent, drawings that consist entirely of dotted lines are omitted.

28
111

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung SCH-I500 (Mesmerize / Showcase
i500 / Showcase Galaxy S / Fascinate)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

b.

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
112

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

c.

Samsung Galaxy Ace

22

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy Ace

23
24
25
26
27
28
113

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy Ace

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
114

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

d.

2

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G
Samsung Galaxy S 4G

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
115

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

e.

2

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Infuse 4G
Samsung Infuse 4G

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
116

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

f.

2

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant
Samsung Vibrant

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
117

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

g.

Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch

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
118

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

h.

Samsung Galaxy S II (T-Mobile)

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S II (T-Mobile)

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
119

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

i.

Samsung Galaxy S II (AT&T)

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S II (AT&T)

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
120

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

j.

Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket

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
121

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2

k.

3

D’677 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S II i9100
Samsung Galaxy S II i9100

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
122

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2

4.

The D’270 Patent

3
4
5

Each accused Samsung product incorporates a body and front face that are substantially
the same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’270 Patent.

6

a.

7

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000
Samsung Galaxy S i9000

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
123

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

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
124

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

b.

2

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G
Samsung Galaxy S 4G

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
125

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

c.

Samsung Vibrant

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant

23
24
25
26
27
28
126

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant

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
127

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

D’270 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant

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
128

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

5.

The D’790 Patent

2
3
4

Each accused Samsung product incorporates an array of icons that is substantially the
same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’790 Patent.

5

a.

Samsung Captivate

6

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Captivate

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
b.

Samsung Continuum

17
18

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Continuum

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
129

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

c.

Samsung Droid Charge

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Droid Charge

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

d.

14

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Epic 4G
Samsung Epic 4G

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
130

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

e.

2

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Fascinate
Samsung Fascinate

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
f.

Samsung Gem

13
14

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Gem

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
131

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

g.

2

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000
Samsung Galaxy S i9000

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

h.

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

13

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
132

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

i.

2

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Indulge
Samsung Indulge

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

j.

Samsung Infuse 4G

13
14

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Infuse 4G

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
133

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

k.

2

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Mesmerize
Samsung Mesmerize

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

l.

14

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase Galaxy S
Samsung Showcase Galaxy S

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
134

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

m.

2

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase i500
Samsung Showcase i500

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
n.

Samsung Vibrant

13
14

D’790 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
135

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

6.

The D’334 Patent4

2
Each accused Samsung product incorporates an array of icons that is substantially the

3
4

same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’334 Patent.

5

a.

Samsung Captivate

6

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Captivate

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
4

27

In the charts below with respect to the D’334 patent, only one figure is presented out of the eight figures in the
design patent. Each figure in the design patent is substantially the same, and the comparison herein applies equally
to each figure...

28
136

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

b.

2

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Continuum
Samsung Continuum

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

c.

Samsung Droid Charge

13

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Droid Charge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
137

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

d.

2

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Epic 4G
Samsung Epic 4G

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

e.

Samsung Fascinate

13
14

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Fascinate

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
138

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

f.

2

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Gem
Samsung Gem

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
139

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

g.

2

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

h.

14

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G
Samsung Galaxy S 4G

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
140

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

i.

Samsung Indulge

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Indulge

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

j.

Samsung Infuse 4G

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Infuse 4G

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
141

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3

k.

Samsung Mesmerize

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Mesmerize

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

l.

Samsung Showcase Galaxy S

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase Galaxy S

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
142

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1
2
3
4

m.

Samsung Showcase i500

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase i500

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

n.

Samsung Vibrant

D’334 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
143

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

7.

The D’305 Patent5

2
Each accused Samsung product incorporates an array of icons that is substantially the

3
4

same in overall visual appearance as the design claimed in the D’305 Patent.

5

a.

Samsung Captivate

6

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Captivate

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5

27

In the charts below with respect to the D’305 patent, only one figure is presented out of the two figures in the
design patent. Each figure in the design patent is substantially the same, and the comparison herein applies equally
to each figure.

28
144

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

b.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Continuum
Samsung Continuum

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

c.

Samsung Droid Charge

13
14

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Droid Charge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
145

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

d.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Epic 4G
Samsung Epic 4G

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

e.

Samsung Fascinate

13
14

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Fascinate

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
146

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

f.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Gem
Samsung Gem

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
g.

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

13
14

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S i9000

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
147

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

h.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Galaxy S 4G
Samsung Galaxy S 4G

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

i.

Samsung Indulge

13
14

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Indulge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
148

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

j.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Infuse 4G
Samsung Infuse 4G

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

k.

Samsung Mesmerize

13

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Mesmerize

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
149

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

l.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase Galaxy S
Samsung Showcase Galaxy S

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

m.

Samsung Showcase i500

13
14

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Showcase i500

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
150

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
1

n.

2

D’305 Patent Claim

Samsung Vibrant
Samsung Vibrant

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
151

APPLE INC.’S RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG’S
FOURTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES
Case No. 11-cv-01846 (LHK)

OPPOS
FOR