Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
1236
Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Samsung's Objections to Apple's Exhibit List, Proposed Joint Exhibit List and Deposition Designations filed by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Trac Declaration, #2 Proposed Order, #3 Samsung's Objections, #4 Ex. A, #5 Ex. B, #6 Ex. C, #7 Ex. D)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 7/13/2012) Modified on 7/16/2012 Pursuant to General Order No. 62 attachment #1 Sealed (dhm, COURT STAFF).
EXHIBIT D
Exhibit D
Objections to Deposition Designations
Samsung generally objects to Appleās planned designation of deposition testimony from
the 794 Investigation (with the exception of specific transcripts as to which the parties have
agreed to cross-use).
Witness from Whom Apple Intends to
Designate Testimony
Objections
Seung-Ho Ahn (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Timothy Benner
Brian Blasius
Robert Brunner
Samsung objects to the designation of
testimony from Mr. Brunner on the grounds
that Apple has not demonstrated that he is
unavailable pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 32(a)(4).
Dong Hoon Chang
Stephanie Chen
Joseph Cheong
Samsung objects to any testimony of Mr.
Cheong beyond the scope of Apple's
representations to the Court in its motion to
compel as to the subjects on which it intended
to depose him.
Benjamin Cheung
Joon-Young Cho
Nara Cho
Seungwhan Cho
Sung Ho Choi (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Gee-sung Choi
Gin-kyu Choi
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Joon Ill Choi (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Soon-Jae Choi
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Minhyung Chung (NDCAL and ITC
testimony)
02198.51855/4853553.1
1
Witness from Whom Apple Intends to
Designate Testimony
Objections
Cira Conley
Justin Denison (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Sung-Ho Eun
Wong Pyo Hong
Moon-Sang Jeong
Hee-Won Kang (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Monica Karo
Corey Kerstetter
Wookyun Kho
Ahyoung Kim (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Bora Kim (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Byungwook Kim
Hun Kee Kim
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Jae Yoel Kim
Jinsoo Kim (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Min-Goo Kim (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Minkyung Kim
Noh-Sun Kim
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Se-Hyoung Kim
Sehyun Kim
Seong Guen Kim (NDCAL and ITC
testimony)
Seongwoo Kim (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Soeng-Hun Kim
Young-Bum Kim (NDCAL and ITC
02198.51855/4853553.1
2
Witness from Whom Apple Intends to
Designate Testimony
Objections
testimony)
Yong-Jun Kwak (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Ioi Lam (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Samsung objects to the designation of
testimony from Mr. Lam on the grounds that
Apple has not demonstrated that he is
unavailable pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 32(a)(4).
DonJoo Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
GiYoung Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
HyeJung Lee
Hyeon Woo Lee
JuHo Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Jun-Sung Lee
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
JunWon Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Kiwon Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
MinHyouk Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Sanguen Lee
Seung Yun Lee
Sungsik Lee
YunJung Lee (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Qi Ling
Samsung objects to the designation of
testimony from Mr. Ling on the grounds that
Apple has not demonstrated that he is
unavailable pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 32(a)(4).
Daniel Mauney
Travis Merrill (ITC testimony)
Young-Suk Moon
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Ki Hyung Nam (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Jeong Seok Oh
Markus Paltian
Chang Soo Park
Hyoung Shin Park (NDCAL and ITC
testimony)
Junho Park
Sang-Ryul Park
Seunggun Park
02198.51855/4853553.1
3
Witness from Whom Apple Intends to
Designate Testimony
Objections
Todd Pendleton (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Sean Roarty
Brian Rosenberg
Karl Heinz Rosenbrock (NDCAL and ITC
testimony)
Tim Rowden (ITC testimony)
DongSeok Ryu
MinCheol Shin
Tim Sheppard (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Jaegwan Shin (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Samsung objects to the designation of
testimony from Mr. Shin on the grounds that
Apple has not demonstrated that he is
unavailable pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 32(a)(4).
Jaehwang Sim
Dale Sohn
Hangil Song (NDCAL and ITC testimony)
Himke Van Der Velde
Gert-Jan Van Lieshout
Jeeyeun Wang
Richard Wesel
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an expert
regarding patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Hyun Goo Woo
JungMin Yeo
Sun Young Yi
Seung Hun Yoo
Jae-Seung Yoon
Samsung objects to designations from this
witness on the ground the witness is an
inventor of patent(s) that are no longer being
asserted and hence irrelevant.
Andre Zorn
02198.51855/4853553.1
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?