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

Filing 1060

*** Declaration of Trevor Darrell in Support of Samsung's Reply and Exhibit D and E to Darrell Declaration FILED IN ERROR WITH CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. DOCUMENT LOCKED. *** Administrative Motion to File Under Seal filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.(a New York corporation), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC(a Delaware limited liability company). (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Motion to File Documents Under Seal, #2 Samsung's Reply in Support of Motion to Strike Expert Testimony Based on Undislcosed Facts and Theories, #3 Declaration of Christopher E. Price in Support of Samsung's Reply, #4 Exhibit 1 to Price Declaration, #5 Exhibit 2 to Price Declaration, #6 Exhibit 3 to Price Declaration, #7 Exhibit 4 to Price Declaration, #8 Exhibit 5 to Price Declaration, #9 Exhibit 6 to Price Declaration, #10 Exhibit 7 to Price Declaration, #11 Exhibit 8 to Price Declaration, #12 Exhibit 9 to Price Declaration, #13 Exhibit 10 to Price Declaration, #14 Exhibit 11 to Price Declaration, #15 Exhibit 12 to Price Declaration, #16 Exhibit 13 to Price Declaration, #17 Exhibit 14 to Price Declaration, #18 Exhibit 15 to Price Declaration, #19 Exhibit 16 to Price Declaration, #20 Exhibit 17 to Price Declaration, #21 Exhibit 18 to Price Declaration, #22 Exhibit 19 to Price Declaration, #23 Exhibit 20 to Price Declaration, #24 Exhibit 21 to Price Declaration, #25 Exhibit 22 to Price Declaration, #26 Exhibit 23 to Price Declaration, #27 Exhibit 24 to Price Declaration, #28 Exhibit 25 to Price Declaration, #29 Exhibit 26 to Price Declaration, #30 Exhibit 27 to Price Declaration, #31 Exhibit 28 to Price Declaration, #32 Exhibit 29 to Price Declaration, #33 Exhibit 30 to Price Declaration, #34 Exhibit 31 to Price Declaration, #35 Declaration of Michael J. Wagner in Support of Samsung's Reply, #36 Exhibit A to Wagner Declaration, #37 Exhibit B to Wagner Declaration, #38 Exhibit C to Wagner Declaration, #39 Declaration of Trevor Darrell in Support of Samsung's Reply, #40 Exhibit A to Darrell Declaration, #41 Exhibit B to Darrell Declaration, #42 Exhibit C to Darrell Declaration, #43 Exhibit D to Darrell Declaration, #44 Exhibit E to Darrell Declaration)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 6/7/2012) Modified on 6/8/2012 (fff, COURT STAFF).

EXHIBIT 23

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781)
[e-mail]
2 MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)
[e-mail]
JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368)
[e-mail]
0 ALISON M. TUCHER (CA SBN 171363)
[e-mail]
RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425)
rhung@mofo. corn
6 JASON R. BARTLETT (CA SBN 214530)
[e-mail]
7 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
8
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
9
Facsimile: [phone]

WILLIAM F. LEE
[e-mail]
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
60 State Street
Boston, MA 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]

10
11

Attorneys for Plaintiff and
Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC.

12
13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN JOSE DIVISION

17

APPLE INC., a California corporation,

18
19
20
21
22

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)

Plaintiff,
V.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean corporation; 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 SIXTH
AND SEVENTH SETS OF
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

23
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG's 6TH AND
CASE No. 11-CV- 01846-LHK (PSG)

sf-3106415

7TH

SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 375 :

2
3

All research, studies, reports or other DOCUMENTS REFERRING TO OR RELATING
TO the impact of any aspect of the design of each version of the iPhone or iPad claimed by the

4 APPLE DESIGN PATENTS or APPLE TRADE DRESS of each version of the iPhone or iPad's
5

sales or consumer preferences or purchasing decisions.

6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 375 :

7

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

8

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

9

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

10

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

11

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) would require

12

Apple to draw a legal conclusion to respond; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are

13

already in Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Additionally, Apple objects to this

14

request to the extent that it calls for information which contains or otherwise reflects its trade

15

secrets or any other confidential research, development, financial, commercial or proprietary

16

information. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time.

17

Apple further objects to the terms "relating to" and "any aspect of the design" to the extent that it

18

fails to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents sought. Finally, Apple

19

objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, including in its

20

use of the undefined terms "consumer preferences," and "purchasing decisions."

21

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

22

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies in its

23

possession, custody, or control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

24 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 376 :
25
26

All DOCUMENTS REFERRING TO OR RELATING TO the impact of manufacturing,
supply or inventory constraints on sales of each version of the iPhone or iPad.

27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11 -CV-0 1 846-LHK (PSG)
sf-3106415

18

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 376

:

2

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

3

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

4

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

5

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

6

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; or (iii) are outside of

7

Apple's possession, custody, or control. Additionally, Apple objects to this request to the extent

8

that it calls for information which contains or otherwise reflects its trade secrets or any other

9

confidential research, development, financial, commercial or proprietary information. Apple

10

further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Apple further objects to

11

the terms "relating to" or "constraints" to the extent that it fails to provide reasonable particularity

12

as to the scope of the documents sought. Finally, Apple objects to this request on the grounds

13

that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and therefore unduly burdensome.

14

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

15

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or

16

control, if any, located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over

17

time for each version of the iPhone and iPad.

18

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 377

19

:

All research, studies, reports and other DOCUMENTS REFERRING TO OR RELATING

20

TO consumer perceptions of the APPLE brand, changes in consumer perceptions of the APPLE

21

brand and the reasons for such perceptions or changes in perceptions any time from January 1,

22

2006 to the present.

23

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 377

:

24

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

25

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

26

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

27

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

28

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)

sf- 3106415

19

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

limited to market segments, the size of actual and potential markets, market growth rates,
2

potential customer bases, the product offerings and pricing of competitors, actual and anticipated
market shares, and product sales and profitability.

El

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 414

:

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and
6

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

7

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

8

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

9

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

10

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already

11

in Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Apple further objects to this request on the

12

grounds that it is unlimited in time. Apple further objects to the terms "relating to," "all

13

DOCUMENTS," and "reasons why" to the extent that they fail to provide reasonable particularity

14

as to the scope of the documents sought. Apple further objects to Samsung's request as

15

overbroad to the extent it purports to require Apple to conduct a search for documents that is

16

more extensive than is reasonable under the circumstances. Finally, Apple objects to this request

17

on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and therefore unduly burdensome.

18

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

19

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market studies in its possession, custody, or

20

control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

21

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 415

22

:

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show APPLE's manufacturing or supply capacity for any

23

products that APPLE contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-IN-SUIT and/or

24

are covered by the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.

25

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 415

:

26

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

27

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

28

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
sf- 3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
45

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

2

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

3

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

4

respond. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally,

5

Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and

6

therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms "manufacturing

7

or supply capacity."

8

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

9

produced responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or control, if any,

10

located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over time for each

11

version of the iPhone and iPad.

12 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 416 :
13

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show APPLE's marketing and sales capacity for any products

14 that APPLE contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-IN-SUIT and/or are covered
15 by the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.
16 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 416 :

17

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

18

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

19

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

20

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

21

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

22

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

23

respond. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally,

24

Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and

25

therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms "marketing and

26

sales capacity," which fails to identify with sufficient particularity the documents sought.

27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11 -CV-0 1 846-LHK (PSG)

sf-3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

46

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1
2

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 417

:

All DOCUMENTS relating to any constraints on APPLE's manufacturing or supply

3

capacity for any products that APPLE contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-

4

IN-SUIT and/or are covered by the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.

5

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 417

:

6

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

7

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

8

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

9

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

10

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

11

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

12

respond. Apple further objects to the terms "relating to" and "all DOCUMENTS" to the extent

13

that they fail to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents sought. Apple

14

further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally, Apple objects to

15

this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and therefore unduly

16

burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms "manufacturing or supply

17

capacity."

18

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

19

produced responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or control, if any,

20

located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over time for each

21

version of the iPhone and iPad.

22

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 418

:

23

All DOCUMENTS relating to any constraints on APPLE's marketing and sales capacity

24

for any products that APPLE contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-IN-SUIT

25

and/or are covered by the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.

26

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 418

:

27

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

28

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11 -CV-0 1 846-LHK (PSG)
47
sf-3106415

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

2

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

3

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

4

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

5

respond. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally,

6

Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and

7

therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms "constraint" and

8

"marketing and sales capacity," which fail to identify with sufficient particularity the documents

9

sought.

10 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 419 :
11

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show any supply shortages of any products that APPLE

12 contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-IN-SUIT and/or are covered by the
13 APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.
14 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 419 :

15

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

16

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

17

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

18

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

19

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

20

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

21

respond. Apple further objects to the terms "relating to" and "all DOCUMENTS" to the extent

22

that they fail to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents sought. Apple

23

further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time.

24

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

25

produced responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or control, if any,

26

located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over time for each

27

version of the iPhone and iPad.

28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11 -CV-0 1 846-LHK (PSG)
sf-3106415

48

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 420 :

2

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show any supply or inventory excesses for any products that

3 APPLE contends practice one or more of the APPLE PATENTS-IN-SUIT and/or are covered by
4 the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE TRADEMARKS.

5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 420 :
6

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

7

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

8

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

9

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

10

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; or (iii) are outside of

11

Apple's possession, custody, or control. Apple further objects to the terms "relating to" and "all

12

DOCUMENTS" to the extent that they fail to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of

13

the documents sought. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in

14

time. Finally, Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly

15

broad, and therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms

16

"supply or inventory excesses."

17

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

18

produced responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or control, if any,

19

located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over time for each

20

version of the iPhone and iPad.

21 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 421 :
22

All DOCUMENTS relating to the demand for the technology claimed in the APPLE

23 PATENTS-IN-SUIT and/or the designs covered by the APPLE TRADE DRESS and/or APPLE
24 TRADEMARKS, including but not limited to consumer surveys, consumer focus groups, and
25

comparisons of the benefits, functionality, performance, design, and costs of alternative

26

technologies.

27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11 -Cv-0I 846-LHK (PSG)

sf- 3106415

49

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 421 :

2

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

3

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

4

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

5

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

6

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

7

Apple's possession, custody, or control; (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

8

respond; or (v) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already in Samsung's possession, or are

9

publicly available. Apple further objects to the terms "relating to" and "all DOCUMENTS" to

10

the extent that they fail to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents

11

sought. Finally, Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly

12

broad, and therefore unduly burdensome, including without limitation because of the use of the

13 undefined terms "demand for technology," "consumer surveys," "consumer focus groups,"
14
15

"benefits," and "alternative technologies."
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

16

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies in its

17

possession, custody, or control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

18

19
20

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 422 :
Any intercompany agreement regarding reimbursement of research and development
expenses for work in any way related to tablet computers or mobile phones.

21 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 422 :
22

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad in scope; vague; unduly

23

burdensome; not limited to the issues, parties or products in this action; unnecessary; and not

24

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

25

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

26

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

27

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; or (iii) are outside of

28

Apple's possession, custody, or control. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 1 1-Cv-01846-LHK(PSG)

sf-3106415

50

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

it is unlimited in time. Apple further objects to Samsung's request as overbroad to the extent it

2 purports to require Apple to conduct a search for documents that is more extensive than is
3

reasonable under the circumstances.

4 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 423:
5

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show APPLE'S accounting practices pertaining to the

6 APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS, including but not limited to APPLE'S methods of accounting
7

for revenues, costs and profits, methods of depreciation, allocation of expenses, inventory

8

measurements, profit allocation, losses and assignments of debts, and APPLE'S methods of

9

allocating between United States and worldwide revenue from January 1, 2007 to the present.

10 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 423:
11

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad in scope; vague; unduly

12

burdensome; not limited to the issues, parties or products in this action; unnecessary; and not

13

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

14

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

15

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

16

immunity; or (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case. Apple further

17

objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally, Apple further objects to

18

Samsung's request as overbroad to the extent it purports to require Apple to conduct a search for

19

documents that is more extensive than is reasonable under the circumstances.

20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 424:
21
22

All DOCUMENTS discussing the market for smartphones using the Android operating
system.

23 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 424:
24

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

25

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

26

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

27

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

28

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 1 1-cv-01846-LHK(PSG)

sf-3106415

51

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already
2

in Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Apple further objects to this request that it is

3

not limited to the issues in this action, the products in this action, or the relevant time period, and

4

not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Apple objects that the term "market" is
vague and ambiguous. Apple also objects that this Request is duplicative of prior Requests.
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has
produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies in its
possession, custody, or control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

9
10

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 425

:

All DOCUMENTS discussing competition between each version of the iPhone and

11

smartphones using the Android operating system.

12

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 425

13

:

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

14

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple further objects

15

to this request that it is not limited to the parties, issues, time period, or products in this action,

16

and not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Apple objects to this request to the

17

extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the attorney-

18

client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or immunity; (ii)

19

are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of Apple's

20

possession, custody, or control; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already in

21

Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Finally, Apple objects that the term "discussing

22

competition" is vague and fails to identify with sufficient particularity the documents sought.

23

Apple also objects that this Request is duplicative of prior Requests.

24

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

25

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies in its

26

possession, custody, or control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11-CV- 01846-LHK (PSG)

sf-3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
52

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 426
2

:

All DOCUMENTS discussing competition between each version of the iPad and media

3

tablets using the Android operating system.

4

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 426

5

:

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

6

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple further objects

7

to this request that it is not limited to the parties, issues, time period, or products in this action,
and not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Apple objects to this request to the

9

extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the attorney-

10

client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or immunity; (ii)

11

are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of Apple's

12

possession, custody, or control; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already in

13

Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Finally, Apple objects that the term "discussing

14

competition" is vague and fails to identify with sufficient particularity the documents sought.

15

Apple also objects that this Request is duplicative of prior Requests.

16

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

17

produced or will produce responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies in its

18

possession, custody, or control, if any, located after a reasonable search.

19

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 427

20

:

All DOCUMENTS relating to elasticity, elasticity of demand, or consumer price

21

sensitivity for the APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS.

22

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 427

:

23

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

24

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

25

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

26

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

27

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

28

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) can be obtained as easily by Samsung, are already
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11-CV-01846-LHK (PSG)
sf-3106415

53

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

in Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Apple further objects to the term "relating to"

2

to the extent that it fails to provide reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents

3

sought. Finally, Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly

4 broad, and therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined terms
5

"elasticity" and "consumer price sensitivity".

6

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

7

produced responsive, non-privileged market and consumer studies, and retail, carrier and reseller

8

price lists in its possession, custody, or control located after a reasonable search as discussed in

9

more detail above.

10 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 428:
11

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the capacity to manufacture the APPLE ACCUSED

12 PRODUCTS at any point in time.
13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 428 :

14

Apple objects to this request as untimely, overly broad, vague, unduly burdensome, and

15

not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Apple objects to this

16

request to the extent it seeks production of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the

17

attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or

18

immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of

19

Apple's possession, custody, or control; or (iv) would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to

20

respond. Apple further objects to this request on the grounds that it is unlimited in time. Finally,

21

Apple objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, and

22

therefore unduly burdensome including without limitation to the undefined term "capacity."

23

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple has

24

produced responsive, non-privileged documents in its possession, custody, or control, if any,

25

located after a reasonable search sufficient to show manufacturing capacity over time for each

26

version of the iPhone and iPad.

27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11-CV- 01846-LHK (PSG)

sf-3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

54

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 429 :

2

All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date, RELATING TO the acquisition by APPLE of

3 memory controllers technology from Anobit Technologies used in the APPLE ACCUSED
4 PRODUCTS, including the acquisition agreement, DOCUMENTS reflecting APPLE'S purchase
5

price accounting for the acquisition, and any valuations of assets or intellectual property

6 performed by APPLE or a third-party in connection with the acquisition.
7

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 429 :

8

Apple objects to this request on grounds that it seeks information and/or documents

9

irrelevant to this litigation. Apple further objects to the term "memory controllers technology" as

10

vague and ambiguous. Apple further objects on grounds that this request is overly broad, unduly

11

burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,

12

especially insofar as it seeks "All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date" and information regarding

13

technology not at issue in this litigation. Apple further objects to this request to the extent that it

14

seeks documents outside of Apple's possession, custody, or control. Apple further objects to this

15

request to the extent that it seeks the production of documents that are protected from discovery

16

by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense or common interest

17

privilege, or any other applicable privilege, doctrine, or immunity.

18 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 430 :
19

All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date, RELATING TO the acquisition by APPLE of

20 facial recognition technology from Polar Rose used in the APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS,
21

including the acquisition agreement, DOCUMENTS reflecting APPLE'S purchase price

22

accounting for the acquisition, and any valuations of assets or intellectual property performed by

23

APPLE or a third-party in connection with the acquisition.

24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 430 :
25

Apple objects to this request on grounds that it seeks information and/or documents

26

irrelevant to this litigation. Apple further objects on grounds that this request is overly broad,

27

unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible

28

evidence, especially insofar as it seeks "All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date" and information
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)

sf- 3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

55

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

regarding technology not at issue in this litigation. Apple further objects to this request to the

2

extent that it seeks documents outside of Apple's possession, custody, or control. Apple further

3

objects to this request to the extent that it seeks the production of documents that are protected

4

from discovery by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense or common

5

interest privilege, or any other applicable privilege, doctrine, or immunity.

6 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 431 :

7

All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date, RELATING TO the acquisition by APPLE of 3D

8 mapping technology from C3 Technologies used in the APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS,
9 including the acquisition agreement, DOCUMENTS reflecting APPLE'S purchase price
10

accounting for the acquisition, and any valuations of assets or intellectual property performed by

11

APPLE or a third-party in connection with the acquisition.

12 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 431 :

13

Apple objects to this request on grounds that it seeks information and/or documents

14

irrelevant to this litigation. Apple further objects on grounds that this request is overly broad,

15

unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible

16

evidence, especially insofar as it seeks "All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date" and information

17

regarding technology not at issue in this litigation. Apple further objects to the term "3D

18

mapping technology" as vague and ambiguous. Apple further objects to this request to the extent

19

that it seeks documents outside of Apple's possession, custody, or control. Apple further objects

20

to this request to the extent that it seeks the production of documents that are protected from

21

discovery by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense or common

22

interest privilege, or any other applicable privilege, doctrine, or immunity.

23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 432:
24

All DOCUMENTS, regardless of date, RELATING TO the acquisition by APPLE of web

25 mapping technology from Poly9 used in the APPLE ACCUSED PRODUCTS, including the
26 acquisition agreement, DOCUMENTS reflecting APPLE'S purchase price accounting for the
27

acquisition, and any valuations of assets or intellectual property performed by APPLE or a third-

28

party in connection with the acquisition.
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND
CASE No. 11 -Cv-01846-LHK (PSG)

sf-3106415

7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

56

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

relevant time period in this action. Apple objects to this request to the extent it seeks production

2

of documents that: (i) are protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege or the work

3

product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or immunity; (ii) are not relevant to the claims

4

or defenses at issue in the case; (iii) are outside of Apple's possession, custody, or control; (iv)

5

would require Apple to draw a legal conclusion to respond; or (v) can be obtained as easily by

6

Samsung, are already in Samsung's possession, or are publicly available. Apple further objects to

7

the terms "relating to" and "all DOCUMENTS and things" to the extent that they fail to provide

8

reasonable particularity as to the scope of the documents sought.

9

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections, Apple

10

objects that it is incapable of responding to this request without performing an unduly

11

burdensome search.

12
13
14
15
16

Dated: March 10, 2012

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
/s/ Jason Bartlett
Jason R. Bartlett

Attorneys for Plaintiff
APPLE INC.

17
18
19

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)
CASE No. 11-CV-01846-LHK (PSG)
134
sf- 3106415

MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE
[Fed. R . Civ. P. 5(b)]

1
2
3

I declare that I am employed with the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP, whose address

4

is 425 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-2482. I am not a party to the within cause,

5

and I am over the age of eighteen years.

6

I further declare that on March 10, 2012, I served a copy of:

7

APPLE INC.'S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO SAMSUNG'S SIXTH AND
SEVENTH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

8
9

by electronically mailing a true and correct copy through Morrison & Foerster

LLP's

electronic

10

mail system to the e-mail address(s) set forth below, or as stated on the attached service list per

11

agreement in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b).

12

Charles K. Verhoeven
charlesverhoeven(aiauinnemanuel.com

Kevin P.B. Johnson
kevini ohnsona,ciuinnemanuel.com

Victoria F. Maroulis
victoriamaroulis(a~L
quinnemanuel. com

Michael T. Zeller
[e-mail]

Edward J. DeFranco
eddefranco a,quinnemanuel.com

Margret M. Caruso
margretcaruso(&quinnemanuel.com

Todd M. Briggs
toddbri sgs(a,guinnemanuel.com

Rachel H. Kassabian
rachel(a~kassabian(a)quinnemanuel.corn

13
14
15
16
17
18

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at San

19

Francisco, California on March 10, 2012.

20
21

/s/ Nathan B. Sabri

22

Nathan B. Sabri

23
24
25
26
27
28
APPLE'S RESPONSE TO SAMSUNG'S 6TH AND 7TH SETS OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (365-553)

CASE No. 11 -CV-0 1 846-LHK (PSG)
sf-3106415

135