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

Filing 283

MOTION to Compel Apple to Schedule Inventor Depositions filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. Motion Hearing set for 11/8/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 4th Floor, San Jose before Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal. Responses due by 10/17/2011. Replies due by 10/24/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Kassabian Declaration, # 2 Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 10/1/2011)

Download PDF
1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)  50 California Street, 22nd Floor  San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600  Facsimile: (415) 875-6700  Kevin P.B. Johnson (Bar No. 177129)  Victoria F. Maroulis (Bar No. 202603) th  555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5 Floor Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139  Telephone: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100  Michael T. Zeller (Bar No. 196417)  865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor  Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000  Facsimile: (213) 443-3100  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, CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK  DECLARATION OF RACHEL HERRICK KASSABIAN IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO COMPEL APPLE TO SCHEDULE INVENTOR AND PROSECUTING ATTORNEY DEPOSITIONS  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,  Defendant.  Date: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Courtroom 5, 4th Floor Judge: Hon. Paul S. Grewal   02198.51855/4376046.2 Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK KASSABIAN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO COMPEL 1 I, Rachel Herrick Kassabian, declare: 2 1. I am a partner in the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, 3 counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung 4 Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”). I submit this declaration in 5 support of Samsung’s Motion to Compel Apple to Schedule Inventor and Prosecuting Attorney 6 Depositions. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and, if called 7 upon as a witness, I could and would testify to such facts under oath. 8 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of transcript excerpts from 9 the August 24, 2011 case management conference before Judge Koh. 10 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the Court’s August 25, 11 2011 Case Management Order. 12 4. On September 2, 2011, my colleague Melissa Chan and I met and conferred with 13 Apple’s counsel on a number of subjects, including the need to schedule Apple’s inventor and 14 prosecuting attorney depositions according to the Court’s schedule. In response to our suggestion 15 that the deposition schedule might need to spill into early November to accommodate the 16 approximately 48 planned depositions, Apple’s counsel indicated that it was not amenable to 17 scheduling any of these depositions beyond the November 1 cutoff. For this reason, we presumed 18 that Apple would promptly secure deposition dates for all 48 of these witnesses (many of whom, 19 like the design patent inventors, are Apple’s own employees) to ensure that the November 1 date 20 would be met. 21 5. Between September 12 and 16, 2011, Samsung formally noticed the depositions for 22 nearly all 48 inventors and prosecuting attorneys for Apple’s 15 asserted patents. The depositions 23 were noticed for dates between September 19, 2011 and October 20, 2011, although Samsung 24 indicated via cover letter that it was amenable to alternate dates based on the witness’s schedules. 25 Samsung made clear during various meet and confer communications that it wanted the 26 depositions evenly distributed so that no more than one utility and one design patent witness were 27 being deposed each day (to the extent practicable), and that the inventors and prosecuting attorney 28 deposition dates be similarly distributed so that neither group was clumped at any particular date. 02198.51855/4376046.2 Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK -2KASSABIAN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO COMPEL 1 6. On September 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28 and 29, 2011 the parties exchanged numerous 2 emails and conducted a telephonic meet and confer regarding deposition scheduling issues. 3 During this time, Apple consistently represented that it was working to schedule all the 4 depositions prior to the deadline and was providing dates to Samsung as soon as they were 5 available. Samsung made clear numerous times that it wanted to have design and utility 6 depositions spread out in parallel throughout October. 7 7. By September 29, 2011, Apple still had not scheduled a deposition date for 14 of its 8 15 design patent inventors, despite Samsung’s repeated requests that these particular depositions 9 were critical and needed to be noticed to commence early in October and be spread throughout the 10 month of October, in an orderly fashion. And for the first time in its communications with 11 Samsung, Apple indicated that day that it would not be offering early dates for design patent 12 inventors, because Apple did not believe the November 1, 2011 deadline should apply to design 13 patent inventors. 14 8. On September 30, 2011, I joined lead counsel for the parties during a video meet 15 and confer conference. Apple’s lead counsel stated that they would start confirming dates for the 16 design inventor depositions on Monday, October 3, and would not commit to a date certain by 17 which those scheduling efforts would be complete. Further, Apple’s counsel indicated that it 18 intended to pack all 14 of these depositions into an 11-day period between October 20 and 31, 19 2011. When asked why Apple was insisting on scheduling these critical depositions in this 20 prejudicial fashion despite Samsung’s repeated requests, Apple’s counsel stated only that they 21 were not yet ready to produce the documents relevant to these depositions. 22 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is 23 true and correct. 24 Executed in San Francisco, California, on October 1, 2011. 25 26 27 /S/ Rachel Herrick Kassabian 28 02198.51855/4376046.2 Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK -3KASSABIAN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO COMPEL 1 2 General Order 45 Attestation I, Victoria F. Maroulis, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this 3 Declaration. In compliance with General Order 45(X)(B), I hereby attest that Rachel Herrick 4 Kassabian has concurred in this filing. 5 /s/ Victoria Maroulis 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 02198.51855/4376046.2 Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK -4KASSABIAN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO COMPEL

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?