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

Filing 1617

MOTION for Leave to File Reply to Third-Party Intervenor Reuters America LLC's Opposition to Motion to Seal Trial and Pretrial Evidence filed by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Proposed Order)(Reichman, Courtland) (Filed on 8/8/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C. Courtland L. Reichman (SBN 268873) creichman@mckoolsmith.com 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, 6th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Tel.: 650-394-1400 Fax: 650-551-9901 Attorneys for Non-Party Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 APPLE, INC., a California Corporation, McKool Smith Hennigan P.C. 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600 Redwood Shores, California 94065 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff, vs. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a Korean corporation; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 5:11-CV-01846-LHK NON-PARTY TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY TO THIRD- PARTY INTERVENOR REUTERS AMERICA LLC’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL TRIAL AND PRETRIAL EVIDENCE 1 Non-Party Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (“Ericsson”) respectfully requests leave to reply 2 to Third-Party Intervenor Reuters America LLC’s (“Reuters”) Opposition to Motion to Seal Trial 3 and Pretrial Evidence (Doc. No. 1556). Ericsson’s proposed reply is attached as Exhibit A to the 4 declaration of Courtland L. Reichman filed herewith and in support of this motion. As set forth in 5 the proposed reply, Ericsson will be harmed even if all license information at issue is disclosed, 6 disclosure will not lead to market efficiency and will not improve damage determinations, and 7 Reuters failed to address Ericsson’s evidence in support of its motion. Ericsson seeks leave to 8 address these matters. 9 10 DATED: August 8, 2012 Respectively Submitted, 11 By: /s/ Courtland L. Reichman Courtland L. Reichman McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C. 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, 6th Fl Redwood Shores, CA 94065 McKool Smith Hennigan P.C. 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600 Redwood Shores, California 94065 12 13 14 Attorneys for Non-Party Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Case No. 5:11-CV-01846-LHK NON-PARTY TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON’S REPLY TO THIRD-PARTY INTERVENOR REUTERS AMERICA LLC’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL TRIAL AND PRETRIAL EVIDENCE McKool 548832v1 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 3 4 5 6 7 I am employed in the County of San Mateo, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600, Redwood Shores, California 94065. On August 8, 2012, all counsel of record who are registered ECF users are being served with a copy of the foregoing document described as NON-PARTY TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY TO THIRD- PARTY INTERVENOR REUTERS AMERICA LLC’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL TRIAL AND PRETRIAL EVIDENCE via the Electronic Case Filing Program of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California per Local Rule 5-3.3. 8 Executed on August 8, 2012, at Redwood Shores, California. 9 10 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. 11 McKool Smith Hennigan P.C. 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600 Redwood Shores, California 94065 12 /s/ Janet Wasson Janet Wasson 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 5:11-CV-01846-LHK NON-PARTY TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY TO THIRD-PARTY INTERVENOR REUTERS AMERICA LLC’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL TRIAL AND PRETRIAL EVIDENCE McKool 548832v1

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?