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

Filing 467

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Motion to Compel, #2 Exhibit Mazza Declaration, #3 Exhibit Ex. 1 to Mazza Decl, #4 Exhibit Ex. 2 to Mazza Decl, #5 Exhibit Ex. 3 to Mazza Decl, #6 Exhibit Ex. 4 to Mazza Decl, #7 Exhibit Ex. 5 to Mazza Decl, #8 Exhibit Ex. 6 to Mazza Decl, #9 Exhibit Ex. 7 to Mazza Decl, #10 Exhibit Ex. 8 to Mazza Decl, #11 Exhibit Ex. 9 to Mazza Decl, #12 Exhibit Ex. 10 to Mazza Decl, #13 Exhibit Ex. 11 to Mazza Decl, #14 Exhibit Ex. 12 to Mazza Decl, #15 Exhibit Ex. 13 to Mazza Decl, #16 Exhibit Ex. 14 to Mazza Decl, #17 Exhibit Ex. 15 to Mazza Decl, #18 Exhibit Ex. 16 to Mazza Decl, #19 Exhibit Ex. 17 to Mazza Decl, #20 Exhibit Ex. 18 to Mazza Decl, #21 Proposed Order)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 12/8/2011) Modified on 12/15/2011 (feriab, COURT STAFF). (Attachment 10 replaced on 12/21/2011) (sp, COURT STAFF). (Attachment 16 replaced on 12/21/2011) (sp, COURT STAFF). PURSUANT TO ORDER #523 DOCUMENTS 467-10 AND 467-16 REMOVED. Modified on 12/21/2011 (sp, COURT STAFF).

Exhibit 8

425 MARKET STREET
SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA 94105-2482
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 415.268.7522
WWW.MOFO.COM

September 29, 2011

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
NEW YORK, SAN FRANCISCO,
LOS ANGELES, PALO ALTO,
SACRAMENTO, SAN DIEGO,
DENVER, NORTHERN VIRGINIA,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
TOKYO, LONDON, BRUSSELS,
BEIJING, SHANGHAI, HONG KONG

Writer’s Direct Contact
415.268.6096
[e-mail]

Via Email [e-mail]
Kevin Johnson
Victoria Maroulis
Quinn Emanuel
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Re: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., & Samsung Telecomm., LLC
Case No. 11-cv-1846 LHK (N.D. Cal.)
Dear Kevin and Victoria:
In order to avoid future misunderstandings, we are writing to confirm the following items with
respect to the Court’s Order of September 28, 2011.
As to item 1), the Court ordered Samsung to produce documents from each of Samsung
designers of Samsung’s Galaxy S 4G and Infuse 4G, Droid Charge phones and Galaxy Tab 10.1
tablet computer identified in Samsung’s Rule 26(a) disclosures or interrogatory responses. This
encompasses at least the following individuals: Jinsoo Kim, Jung Min Yeo, Minhyouk Lee,
Hyoung Shin Park, GiYoung Lee, Yongseok Bang, Bo-ra Kim, Yunjung Lee, Wookyun Kho,
Kihyung Nam, Dooju Byun, Jaegwan Shin, Qi Ling, Jeeyeun Wang, SeungHun Yoo, Ahyoung
Kim, Sun-young Yi, Min Kyung Kim, and Hyunho Shin. The Court further ordered production
of “all documents referencing the Apple products alleged by Apple to embody one or more of
the ornamental or utility features claimed in the patents.” The Apple products embodying one
or more of the features claimed in the patents are the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4,
iPad, and iPad 2. Thus, at a minimum, Samsung should be producing all references to these
products in the files of the above list of custodians.
As to item 2), the Court ordered Samsung to produce, “[f]rom the custodial files of Lee DonJoo, all documents relating to the redesign of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 following Apple’s
announcement of the iPad 2 on or about March 2, 2011.” (Id.) Please note that the Order is not
limited to documents mentioning the iPad 2. It goes to all documents concerning the redesign
after March 2, 2011.

sf-3051596

Kevin Johnson
Victoria Maroulis
September 29, 2011
Page Two
As to item 3), the Court ordered Samsung to produce, “[f]rom any central files or the custodial
files of any individuals with specific responsibility for surveying customers of Samsung’s
Galaxy S 4G and Infuse 4G, Droid Charge phones and Galaxy Tab 10.1 table computer, all
survey documents that reference the Apple products currently alleged by Apple to embody one
or more the ornamental or utility features claimed in the patents.” (Id.) We are assuming that
Samsung will conduct a diligent search for these documents in all central files, including those
in the U.S. and Korea, as well as the relevant custodial files. Again, the Apple products
embodying one or more of the features claimed in the patents are the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone
3GS, iPhone 4, iPad, and iPad 2.
Finally, the Court also ordered Samsung to produce “all other relief requested by Apple” that
was “unopposed by Samsung.” (Id.) This should include the requests pertaining to marketing
documents and survey documents involving the Samsung products at issue. Samsung also made
a number of representations on the record as to what it had already produced or was going to
produce shortly. This includes the following materials, which should be produced in full (if
Samsung has not done so already) at the latest by October 7:
•

All CAD Design files. (Id. at p. 46.)

•

All loose notes and presentations on the design of the products at issue (and sketch
books if there are any). (Id. at p. 47.)

•

All documents “regarding marketing analysis of Apple products including documents
looking at the internals of the iPhones, [and] the tear downs.” (Id. at p. 47.)

•

All “designer drawings,” “PowerPoints,” and “marketing documents with designs
embedded.” (Id. at p. 59.)

The above description is not intended to limit the scope of that Order. Rather, it is intended to
clarify our understanding so that there are no surprises on October 7. Please let us know by
October 3 if you do not agree with the above understanding of the Order.

Sincerely,
/s/
Wesley Overson

sf-3051596

2