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

Filing 1216

MOTION Samsung's Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge re #1144 Order Granting-in-Part and Denying-in-Part Motionis to Strike Expert Reports filed by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. Responses due by 7/25/2012. Replies due by 8/1/2012. (Attachments: #1 Martin Decl., #2 Ex. 1, #3 Ex. 2, #4 Ex. 3, #5 Ex. 4, #6 Ex. 5, #7 Ex. 6, #8 Ex. 7, #9 Ex. 8, #10 Ex. 9, #11 Ex. 10, #12 Ex. 11, #13 Ex. 12, #14 Ex. 13, #15 Ex. 14, #16 Ex. 15, #17 Ex. 16, #18 Ex. 17, #19 Ex. 18, #20 Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 7/11/2012)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)
[e-mail]

50 California Street, 22nd Floor
 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]


Kevin P.B. Johnson (Bar No. 177129
[e-mail]
Victoria F. Maroulis (Bar No. 202603)

[e-mail]
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor

Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139
[phone]
 Telephone:
Facsimile:
[phone]

Michael T. Zeller (Bar No. 196417)
[e-mail]

865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor
 Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
 INC. and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

 APPLE INC., a California corporation,

CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK



DECLARATION OF JOBY MARTIN IN
SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION
FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE
JUDGE



Plaintiff,
vs.

 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity; SAMSUNG
 ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation; SAMSUNG
 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,

Defendant.




02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

I, Joby Martin, declare as follows:



1.

I am an associate in the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP,

 counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung
 Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”). I submit this declaration in
 support of Samsung’s Motion For Relief From Magistrate Judge Grewal’s Nondispositive Pretrial
 Order, entered June 27, 2012. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration
 and, if called upon as a witness, I could and would testify to such facts under oath.


2.

On July 1, 2012, counsel for Samsung contacted counsel for Apple to propose that

 the parties withdraw their objections to certain expert evidence that was excluded by Magistrate
 Judge Grewal’s June 27 Order Granting-In-Part and Denying-In-Part Motions to Strike Expert
 Reports (“June 27 Order”) (Dkt. 1144). Counsel for Apple responded on July 2, 2012, refusing
 Samsung’s proposed compromise without making any counterproposal.


3.

On July 3, 2012, counsel for Samsung contacted counsel for Apple in order to

 clarify that Apple, as it had represented to Magistrate Judge Grewal, had not moved to strike prior
 art references and non-infringement opinions that Samsung disclosed in its Opposition to Apple’s
 Motion For Preliminary Injunction, and declarations in support thereof.


4.

On July 5, 2012, counsel for Apple responded by agreeing that Samsung’s

 preliminary injunction briefing adequately disclosed one prior art reference (KR30-0452985) that
 Apple had included in the proposed order filed in connection with Apple’s motion to strike.
 Apple’s counsel denied that Samsung’s preliminary injunction briefing adequately disclosed any
 of the remaining prior art references or non-infringement arguments included in Apple’s proposed
 order.


5.

On July 6, 2012, counsel for Samsung again contacted Apple’s counsel in order to

 clarify its position regarding certain prior art references and non-infringement theories. As of the
 date of this filing, the parties have not reached an agreement with respect to a stipulation regarding
 the KR30-0452985 prior art reference.


6.

A true and correct copy of the email chain described in paragraphs 3 – 5 above is

 attached hereto as Exhibit 18.
02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-1MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

7.

Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a chart I prepared with assistance of my colleagues

2 setting forth the chronology of Samsung’s disclosures of the prior art references that the June 27
3 Order struck from the expert reports of Itay Sherman, Robert Anders, and Samuel Lucente.
4

8.

Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a chart I prepared with assistance of my colleagues.

5 The chart lists each of the prior art references that the June 27 Order struck from the expert reports
6 of Mr. Sherman and Mr. Anders, as well as instances where each reference was disclosed during
7 the period for discovery in this litigation.
8

9.

On December 19, 2011, Samsung served its Objections and Responses to Apple

9 Inc.’s Fifth Set of Interrogatories, including Samsung’s response to Interrogatory No. 12
10 (“December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12”). In addition to the references disclosed by
11 Samsung during the preliminary injunction phase of this litigation, many of the references stricken
12 from the expert reports of Mr. Sherman, Mr. Anders and Mr. Lucente were disclosed in
13 Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12, specifically identifying the references
14 as invalidating prior art and listing them by Bates number.
15

10.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed KR 30-

16 0304213 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’889, D’087 and D’677 patents. A true and correct
17 copy of KR 30-0304213, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00021593, is attached hereto as Exhibit
18 3.
19

11.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed U.S.

20 D500,037 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’889, D’087 and D’677 patents. A true and correct
21 copy of U.S. D500,037, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00027716-22, is attached hereto as
22 Exhibit 4.
23

12.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed E.U. Design

24 Reg. 000048061-0001 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’889, D’087 and D’677 patents. A
25 true and correct copy of E.U. Design Reg. 000048061-0001, bearing Bates label
26 SAMNDCA00019932-33, is attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
27

13.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed U.S.

28 D514,590 as invalidating prior art to Apple's D’889, D’087 and D’677 patents. A true and correct
02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-2MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 copy of E.U. registered design U.S. D514,590, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00023918-21, is
2 attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
3

14.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed E.U. Design

4 Reg. 000569157-0005 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’889, D’087 and D’677 patents. A
5 true and correct copy of E.U. Design Reg. 000569157-0005, bearing Bates label
6 SAMNDCA00021315-19, is attached hereto as Exhibit 7.
7

15.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed U.S.

8 D504,889 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’087 and D’677 patents. A true and correct copy
9 of U.S. D504,889, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00200769-73, is attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
10

16.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed E.U. Design

11 Reg. 000584529-0001 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy
12 of E.U. Design Reg. 000584529-0001, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199220-22, is attached
13 hereto as Exhibit 9.
14

17.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed E.U. Design

15 Reg. 000505532-0001 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy
16 of E.U. Design Reg. 000505532-0001, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199223-26, is attached
17 hereto as Exhibit 10.
18

18.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed E.U Design

19 Reg. 000778741-0001 as invalidating prior art to Apple's D’305 patent. A true and correct copy
20 of E.U Design Reg. 000778741-0001, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199230-32, is attached
21 hereto as Exhibit 11.
22

19.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed KR 30-

23 0403504 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of KR 3024 0403504, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199270-75, is attached hereto as Exhibit 12.
25

20.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed KR 30-

26 0441582 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of KR 3027 0441582, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199288-92, is attached hereto as Exhibit 13.
28
02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-3MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

21.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed JP D1189312

2 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of JP D1189312 ,
3 bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199315-19, is attached hereto as Exhibit 14.
4

22.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed JP D1279226

5 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of KR 30-0403504,
6 bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199346-53, is attached hereto as Exhibit 15.
7

23.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed U.S.

8 6,983,424 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of U.S
9 6,983,424, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00199786-806, is attached hereto as Exhibit 16.
10

24.

Samsung’s December 19 Response to Interrogatory No. 12 disclosed U.S.

11 D445,428 as invalidating prior art to Apple’s D’305 patent. A true and correct copy of U.S.
12 D445,428, bearing Bates label SAMNDCA00200533-534, is attached hereto as Exhibit 17.
13
14

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is

15 true and correct. Executed on the 11th of July, 2012, in San Francisco, California.
16
17
18

____/s/ Joby Martin
Joby Martin

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-4MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1
2

General Order 45 Attestation
I, Victoria F. Maroulis, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this

3 Declaration. In compliance with General Order 45(X)(B), I hereby attest that Joby Martin has
4 concurred in this filing.
5

/s/ Victoria Maroulis

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4842720.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-5MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE