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

Filing 1592

Declaration of Jason R. Bartlett in Support of 1591 Opposition/Response to Motion for Adverse Inference Jury Instruction filed byApple Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11)(Related document(s) 1591 ) (Bartlett, Jason) (Filed on 8/6/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781)
[e-mail]
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)
[e-mail]
RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421)
[e-mail]
JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368)
[e-mail]
ALISON M. TUCHER (CA SBN 171363)
[e-mail]
RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425)
[e-mail]
JASON R. BARTLETT (CA SBN 214530)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

WILLIAM F. LEE
[e-mail]
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
60 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
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]

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,
Plaintiff,

18
19
20
21
22

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

DECLARATION OF JASON R.
BARTLETT IN SUPPORT OF
APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR
ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY
INSTRUCTION

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
BARTLETT DECL. ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK

sf-3179362

1

I, JASON R. BARTLETT, declare as follows:

2

1.

I am a partner in the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP, counsel for Apple Inc.

3

(“Apple”). I am licensed to practice law in the State of California and admitted to practice

4

before this Court. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein or understand them to

5

be true from members of my litigation team. I make this declaration in support of Apple’s

6

Opposition to Samsung’s Motion for Adverse Inference Jury Instruction.

7

2.

In conjunction with persons working under my direction, I analyzed Apple’s

8

production of email. In particular, I determined the total number of email sent by, received by,

9

or copying certain Apple employees and the portion of such email sent before and after

10

August 23, 2010. The results of my analysis of the email Apple produced are as follows:

11
Custodian

Total Email

Stringer
Satzger
Whang
Ive
Rohrbach
Forstall
Nishibori
Lemay
Jobs
TOTAL

519
133
149
688
103
1027
136
1029
1670
5454

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

3.

Total Pre8/23/10
Email
388
133
82
522
50
866
102
903
1183
4229

Percentage
75%
100%
55%
76%
49%
84%
75%
88%
71%
78%

Mark Buckley is a financial analyst who prepares financial information obtained

19

from Apple’s Finance department for production in litigation. He regularly testifies as Apple’s

20

corporate representative in depositions. In meet and confer sessions and correspondence Apple

21

disclosed the scope of its finance-related document production. Attached as Exhibit 1 are

22

excerpts from the February 23, 2012 deposition of Beth Kellermann in which she testified with

23

respect to Mark Buckley specifically that his computer’s hard drive would not be searched but

24

instead he would assemble relevant financial information from Apple’s centralized systems of

25

record. Attached as Exhibit 2 is a letter I sent to Diane Hutnyan on March 15, 2012 detailing the

26

scope of Apple’s production of financial information.

27
28
BARTLETT DECL. ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK

sf-3179362

1

1
2
3

4.

Attached as Exhibit 3 is a letter I sent to Diane Hutnyan on March 14, 2012

addressing Apple’s production of documents from model shop employees.
5.

Documents relating to patents-in-suit on which Mr. Hoellwarth worked as outside

4

counsel prior to joining Apple were produced in this action from the files of his former

5

employer.

6

6.

Pursuant to the Court’s order of September 28, beginning in October 2011 and

7

continuing through February 2012, Apple served transparency disclosures identifying, on a

8

witness-by-witness basis, the search terms and date limiting parameters, if any, it used to search

9

Apple’s electronic records.

10

7.

Based on information provided to me from Apple, Brian Huppi left Apple in April

11

2010 and was re-hired on January 30, 2012. He received a document retention notice in

12

connection with this action in February 2012. Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 4 is a true

13

and correct copy of excerpts from the deposition of Brian Huppi taken on October 18, 2011 in

14

this action.

15

8.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

16

from a letter from me to Marissa Ducca dated November 2, 2011 that describes the document

17

collection procedures used by Apple in this action.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

9.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

from the deposition of Douglas Satzger taken on November 8, 2011 in this action.
10.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

from the deposition of Chris Harris taken on March 6, 2012 in this action.
11.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

from the deposition of Mark Lee taken on February 28, 2012.
12.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of Libertarian

25

Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron by Cass R. Sunstein and Richard H. Thaler, 70 U. Chi. L. Rev.

26

1159 (2003).

27
28

13.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

from the deposition of Evans Hankey, taken on March 15, 2012.
BARTLETT DECL. ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK

sf-3179362

2

1
2

14.

Attached to this declaration as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of excerpts

from the deposition of Christopher Prest, taken on March 8, 2012.

3
4
5

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this
6th day of August, 2012 at San Jose, California.

6

/s/ Jason R. Bartlett
Jason R. Bartlett

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

BARTLETT DECL. ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK

sf-3179362

3