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

Filing 1421

OPPOSITION to 1398 Brief Regarding References at Trial "Plaintiff" amd "Defendant" by Apple Inc. (Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 7/27/2012) Modified text on 7/30/2012 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421) JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368) ALISON M. TUCHER (CA SBN 171363) RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425) JASON R. BARTLETT (CA SBN 214530) MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 WILLIAM F. LEE WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 526-6000 Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 SAN JOSE DIVISION 16 17 APPLE INC., a California corporation, 18 19 20 21 22 Plaintiff, v. 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, 23 Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S BRIEF REGARDING REFERENCES AT TRIAL TO “PLAINTIFF” AND “DEFENDANT” Trial: Time: Place: JUDGE: July 30, 2012 9:00 a.m. Courtroom 8, 4th Floor HON. LUCY H. KOH Defendants. 24 25 26 27 28 APPLE INC.’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S BRIEF RE: REFERENCES TO PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK sf-3175805 1 The Court has offered Samsung the opportunity to bifurcate its case—to be a plaintiff 2 asserting patents in a separate case against Apple. Samsung turned the option down. (7/24/2012 3 Hr’g Tr. at 43:3-11.) Now Samsung asks the court to treat it like the plaintiff in front of the jury, 4 referring to the parties as “claimants” and reshuffling counsel tables in the courtroom. Samsung’s 5 proposal contradicts the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and may confuse the jury. 6 Apple is the plaintiff in this case, as the caption on Samsung’s brief indicates. By filing a 7 complaint and summons, Apple became the plaintiff and Samsung the defendant. See Fed. R. 8 Civ. P. 4. By filing its counterclaims in this action, Samsung became a defendant- 9 counterclaimant. (See Dkt. No. 80.) See also Fed. R. of Civ. P. 13. If Samsung wishes to be 10 called something else, it should have tried its affirmative case separately. 11 Samsung’s request to sit near the jury while it bears the burden of proof is unnecessary 12 and inconvenient. Samsung has indicated that it intends to follow Apple’s affirmative case with 13 its own affirmative case, before defending against Apple’s claims. If the trial occurs in this order, 14 Samsung’s request would result in table-swapping every few days. The Court’s management of 15 the trial will mitigate any possible prejudice to Samsung, regardless of where the parties’ lawyers 16 sit. 17 Samsung cites a transcript from one Central District of California case, Mattel v. MGA, 18 Case No. 04-cv-09049 (C.D. Cal. filed Nov. 2, 2004) (Quinn Emanuel representing Mattel), in 19 which the court apparently allowed the parties to switch tables at the end of the plaintiff’s case. 20 That trial was considerably longer than this one (Dkt. No. 1398 at 8 (120 hours per side)), and we 21 have no indication in the transcript fragment Samsung provides as to why the court decided to 22 allow the parties to switch tables. 23 Samsung’s latest attempt to re-write the Court’s guidelines for this trial should be denied. 24 25 26 27 28 APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK sf-3175805 1 1 Dated: July 27, 2012 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 2 3 By: 4 5 /s/ Michael A. Jacobs________ Michael A. Jacobs Attorneys for Plaintiff APPLE INC. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK sf-3175805 2

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?