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

Filing 1466

RESPONSES to 1467 Apple's Objections to Exhibits to be Used in Samsung's Direct Examination of Justin Denison by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.(a Korean corporation), Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 7/30/2012) Modified on 7/31/2012 linking entry to document #1467 (dhm, COURT STAFF). Modified on 8/9/2012 EXHIBIT (DX 627 AND 629) HAVE NOT BEEN MANUALLY SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE FOR FILING (dhm, COURT STAFF).

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151)
 [e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129)
[e-mail]
 Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603)
[e-mail]
th
 555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5 Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065
 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Michael T. Zeller (Cal. 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,



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,

Defendants.


CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S RESPONSES TO APPLE’S
OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE
USED IN SAMSUNG’S DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON




02198.51855/4880759.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S RESPONSES TO APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED IN SAMSUNG’S DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON

1

Samsung hereby submits responses to Apple’s objections to two exhibits Samsung intends

2 to use during its direct examination of Justin Denison.
3 DX627
4

(1) Authentication: This exhibit consists of Best Buy advertisements for electronic

5 devices including smartphones and tablet computers by various manufacturers other than Apple.
6 Justin Denison was the Chief Strategy Officer for Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC
7 (“STA”) during the relevant time period. Part of his job responsibilities included monitoring and
8 reviewing the competitive landscape, and gaining a general understanding of what devices were
9 released by various manufacturers at any given time.

He will testify that as part of this function,

10 he would regularly review marketing by major electronics retailers, including Best Buy, and he
11 will be able to lay a foundation for the advertisements comprising this exhibit by confirming based
12 on his own personal experience that they are what they purport to be.
13

(2) Relevance: The wide variety of electronic devices depicted in this exhibit also is

14 relevant to show that a number of third parties have used aspects of the trade dress claimed by
15 Apple, and therefore that Apple’s claimed trade dress lacks distinctiveness.

The advertisements

16 comprising this exhibit are also relevant to Samsung’s state of mind, as they show that Samsung
17 monitors the competitive marketplace on a regular basis as part of its effort to avoid intellectual
18 property violations.
19

(3) Certain phones excluded by MIL # 3:

Samsung does not intend to show any pages

20 depicting phones that were excluded by the Court’s ruling on MIL #3.
21 DX 629
22

(1) Relevance: This exhibit constitutes a Samsung television advertisement for its Galaxy

23 S II, launched in the fall of 2011. The advertisement, part of Samsung’s “Next Best Thing”
24 campaign, is an explicit attempt by Samsung to draw distinction between Apple’s iPhone and
25 Samsung's product and to direct consumers to Samsung's product.

It demonstrates differences

26 between the products and shows that far from sowing confusion or engaging in deception or
27 dilution Samsung actually is doing the opposite.
28

02198.51855/4880759.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-1SAMSUNG’S RESPONSES TO APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED IN SAMSUNG’S DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON

1

Apple does not dispute that the exhibit is relevant to show “Samsung’s marketing channels,

2 Samsung’s target consumers, and the competitive nature of the parties’ respective products.”
3 July 29, 2012 11:52 p.m. email from Taryn Rawson to Victoria Maroulis et al.

Rather, Apple

4 contends that the exhibit cannot be introduced to show lack of confusion or dilution.

Id.

But

5 Samsung does not intend to argue that this exhibit shows a lack of actual confusion or dilution.
6 Rather, the exhibit is relevant to Samsung’s state of mind (intention), including to rebut Apple’s
7 claims of willful infringement.
8

(2) Hearsay: The exhibit is not being offered for its truth.

Rather, as explained above, it

9 is being offered as relevant to Samsung’s state of mind to avoid, rather than perpetuate, any
10 confusion or dilution with Apple’s products.
11

(3) Foundation:

Mr. Denison, as STA’s Chief Strategy Officer, has personal knowledge

12 regarding Samsung’s marketing strategy generally, and the “Next Best Thing” campaign in
13 particular, and can authenticate this exhibit and testify to the intent behind its creation.
14

(4) Apple’s Proposed Limiting Instruction:

Samsung objects to Apple’s proposed

15 limiting instruction with regard to this exhibit, because the exhibit’s relevance is not limited to the
16 topics Apple has identified – Samsung’s marketing channels, Samsung’s target consumers, and the
17 competitive nature of the parties’ respective products. At a minimum, as discussed above, the
18 exhibit is directly relevant to Samsung’s state of mind.
19
20 DATED: July 30, 2012
21
22
23
24
25
26

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
By /s/ Victoria F. Maroulis
Charles K. Verhoeven
Victoria F. Maroulis
Kevin P.B. Johnson
Michael T. Zeller
Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
AMERICA, INC., and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC

27
28

02198.51855/4880759.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-2SAMSUNG’S RESPONSES TO APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED IN SAMSUNG’S DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON