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

Filing 155

MOTION for Leave to File (Apple Inc.'s Administrative Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to (Document No. 101) Samsung's Motion to Disqualify Bridges & Mavrakakis LLP) filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Declaration)(Benson, Joshua) (Filed on 8/16/2011)

1 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (SBN 66781)
[e-mail]
2 MICHAEL A. JACOBS (SBN 111664)
[e-mail]
3 RICHARD S.J. HUNG (SBN 197425)
[e-mail]
4 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
5 San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
6 Facsimile: [phone]
7 KENNETH H. BRIDGES (SBN 243541)
[e-mail]
8 MICHAEL T. PIEJA (SBN 250351)
[e-mail]
9 BRIDGES & MAVRAKAKIS LLP
3000 El Camino Real
10 One Palo Alto Square, 2nd Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94306
11 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
12
13
14
15 Attorneys for Plaintiff
APPLE INC.
16

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]
WILLIAM F. LEE (pro hac vice anticipated)
[e-mail]
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
60 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
STEPHEN E. TAYLOR (SBN 58452)
[e-mail]
STEPHEN MCG. BUNDY (SBN 253017)
[e-mail]
JOSHUA R. BENSON (SBN 269111)
[e-mail]
TAYLOR & COMPANY LAW OFFICES, LLP
One Ferry Building, Suite 355
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
SAN JOSE DIVISION
19
APPLE INC.,

Case No.: C-11-01846 (LHK)

20
Plaintiff,
21
v.
22
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
23 Korean corporation; SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
24 York corporation; and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
25 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
26

Defendants.

APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY IN OPPOSITION TO
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
BRIDGES & MAVRAKAKIS LLP
Date:
Time:
Place:

August 24, 2011
2:00 p.m.
Courtroom 4, 5th Floor

Honorable Lucy H. Koh

27
28
TAYLOR & CO.
LAW O FFICES, LLP

APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY BRIDGES & MAVRAKAKIS: CASE NO. C-11-01846 (LHK)

1

Pursuant to Local Civil Rules 7-11(a) and 7-3(d), Plaintiff Apple Inc. respectfully moves

2 for leave of Court to file a sur-reply to address new authority from the Northern District of
3 California that defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, Samsung Electronics America, Inc, and
4 Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (“Samsung”) rely upon in their Reply in Support of
5 Samsung’s Motion to Disqualify Bridges & Mavrakakis LLP (“Reply”). Attached hereto as
6 Exhibit 1 is Apple’s proposed Sur-Reply to the Reply (“Apple’s Sur-Reply”). The Declaration of
7 Joshua R. Benson in Support of Apple Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to
8 Samsung’s Motion to Disqualify Bridges & Mavrakakis LLP is filed concurrently herewith.
9

In its Reply, Samsung cites and relies upon the decision in Oliver v. SD-3C, Case No.

10 C-11-01260 (N.D. Cal Aug. 4, 2011) to support its Motion for Disqualification. The Oliver
11 decision was issued on August 4, 2011, after Apple filed its Opposition to the Motion to
12 Disqualify on August 1, 2011, and consequently Apple has not had an opportunity to brief or
13 argue the decision.
14

Good cause therefore exists to grant Apple’s request. See, e.g., Landmark Screens, LLC v.

15 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, No. 08-cv-2581 (JF), 2010 WL 3629816 at *2 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 14,
16 2010) (sur-reply permitted where authority cited for first time in reply papers); Altavion, Inc. v.
17 Konica-Monolta Sys. Lab., Inc., No. 07-cv-6358 (MHP), 2008 WL 2020593 at *1 n.1 (N.D. Cal.
18 May 8, 2008) (sur-reply permitted where reply papers “relied upon cases which had not been
19 previously cited”); Sharper Image Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., No 03-4094 (MMC)
20 2004 WL 2713064 (N.D. Cal. Feb 23, 2004) at *1 (similar).
21

Apple has contacted counsel for Samsung and they have stipulated to Apple’s request to

22 file a sur-reply, as reflected in Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Granting Apple Inc. Leave to File
23 Sur-Reply in Opposition to Samsung’s Motion to Disqualify Bridges & Mavrakakis, LLP, filed
24 August 16, 2011.
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
TAYLOR & CO.
LAW O FFICES, LLP

1.
APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY BRIDGES & MAVRAKAKIS: CASE NO. C-11-01846 (LHK)

1

For the foregoing reasons, Apple respectfully requests that the Court grant leave to file the

2 sur-reply attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
3
4 Dated: August 16, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

5

TAYLOR & COMPANY LAW OFFICES, LLP

6
7
8
9

By:

Joshua R. Benson
Joshua R. Benson
Attorneys for Plaintiff APPLE INC.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TAYLOR & CO.
LAW O FFICES, LLP

2.
APPLE INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY BRIDGES & MAVRAKAKIS: CASE NO. C-11-01846 (LHK)