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

Filing 272

MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages Motion for Administrative Relief to Exceed Page Limit filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit G, # 9 Proposed Order)(Bartlett, Jason) (Filed on 9/29/2011)

Download PDF
Exhibit G From: Overson, Wesley E. Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 6:38 PM To: 'Kevin Johnson'; Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Kevin, Our declarations will be truly rebuttal in nature, and the schedule provides that Apple gets to have the last word here. You have apparently concluded that you need further depositions even before you have seen the declarations. If, after reviewing the declarations, you disagree that they are rebuttal in nature, then we can hear you out on that. However, we will not agree to depositions of all declarants across the board. It is unfortunate that you have linked this issue to our request for a page limit extension. Tonight we will be filing a motion to extend the page limit that could have been avoided. Regards, Wes From: Kevin Johnson [mailto:kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 4:57 PM To: Overson, Wesley E.; Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Wes, I reviewed Jason’s response. Telling us that we should first review the declarations and then we will meet and confer on the issue doesn’t answer the question as to whether Apple will make its declarants available. If Samsung decides it wants to pursue the depositions, will Apple agree? Has Apple confirmed the witnesses are available? Given the short amount of time before the hearing, I am sure you understand where we are coming from. Best, Kevin From: Overson, Wesley E. [mailto:WOverson@mofo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 4:19 PM To: Kevin Johnson; Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Page 2 of 6 Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Kevin, I just asked Jason to send it to you. Please confirm that you agree to the 30-page reply brief. Regards, Wes From: Kevin Johnson [mailto:kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 4:08 PM To: Overson, Wesley E.; Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Wes, We unconditionally offered 25 pages for Apple’s reply brief. Apple said 25 pages is not enough. Apple wants 30 pages. We are inclined to grant the extra pages but I ask for the courtesy of a response to our previous inquiries on whether Apple will make its reply declarants available for deposition. I do not understand why Apple will not commit to making any of its declarants available for deposition. Is it because Apple will oppose our attempt to depose any declarants? Surely Apple has a position on this issue. What is it? Best, Kevin From: Overson, Wesley E. [mailto:WOverson@mofo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 3:54 PM To: Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; Kevin Johnson; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Victoria, We asked for a simple agreement on extra pages to avoid having to file a motion. We are seeking the reciprocal professional courtesy that we extended to Samsung and your Firm. We are not seeking a conditional approval. Please let us know whether you will agree to our request or agree not to oppose our motion. Regards, Wes From: Victoria Maroulis [mailto:victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 2:58 PM To: Overson, Wesley E.; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; Kevin Johnson; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Wes, 9/29/2011 Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Page 3 of 6 We will agree on 15 extra pages provided Apple confirms that it will make any reply declarants available for deposition next week. Please confirm. Thanks. Victoria Maroulis Partner, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 650-801-5022 Direct 650.801.5000 Main Office Number 650.801.5100 FAX victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. From: Overson, Wesley E. [mailto:WOverson@mofo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 1:27 PM To: Victoria Maroulis; Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Hung, Richard S. J.; Kevin Johnson; McElhinny, Harold J.; Jacobs, Michael A. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Victoria, We accomodated your request for an extra 15 pages on your opposition. We would ask that you reconsider and agree to this comparable request. Jason is responding to your question about Reply declarations in a separate email. Regards, Wes From: Victoria Maroulis [mailto:victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 6:46 AM To: Bartlett, Jason R.; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Overson, Wesley E.; Hung, Richard S. J. Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Samsung concurs with filing under seal. 30 pages is excessive as it doubles Apple’s reply, particularly considering that Samsung approved significant number of additional pages for Apple’s moving papers. Solely to avoid motion practice, Samsung will agree to a reply brief of 25 pages. I have not received a response to my correspondence regarding whether Apple will submit reply declarations. 9/29/2011 Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Page 4 of 6 Please respond at your earliest convenience. Victoria Maroulis Partner, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 650-801-5022 Direct 650.801.5000 Main Office Number 650.801.5100 FAX victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. From: Bartlett, Jason R. [mailto:JasonBartlett@mofo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 7:42 PM To: Victoria Maroulis; Sara Jenkins; Melissa Chan Cc: Overson, Wesley E.; Hung, Richard S. J. Subject: Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Counsel, Apple plans to request leave to file a 30 page reply in support of the motion for preliminary injunction. Apple also plans to file its reply and supporting papers under seal because it will contain information designated as confidential. Will Samsung stipulate to the extra pages and the filing under seal? Sincerely, Jason R. Bartlett Morrison & Foerster 425 Market St. San Francisco, CA 94105 Direct: 415.268.6615 --------------------------------------------------------------------To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Morrison & Foerster LLP informs you that, if any advice concerning one or more U.S. Federal tax issues is contained in this communication (including any attachments), such advice is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. For information about this legend, go to http://www.mofo.com/Circular230/ ============================================================================ 9/29/2011 Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Page 5 of 6 This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Morrison & Foerster LLP informs you that, if any advice concerning one or more U.S. Federal tax issues is contained in this communication (including any attachments), such advice is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. For information about this legend, go to http://www.mofo.com/Circular230/ ============================================================================ This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Morrison & Foerster LLP informs you that, if any advice concerning one or more U.S. Federal tax issues is contained in this communication (including any attachments), such advice is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. For information about this legend, go to http://www.mofo.com/Circular230/ ============================================================================ This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Morrison & Foerster LLP informs you that, if any advice concerning one or more U.S. Federal tax issues is contained in this communication (including any attachments), such advice is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of 9/29/2011 Apple v. Samsung - Motions related to PI Reply Page 6 of 6 (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. For information about this legend, go to http://www.mofo.com/Circular230/ ============================================================================ This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 9/29/2011

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?