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

Filing 547

MOTION for Reconsideration re #515 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Derrick Robinson, #2 Exhibit Exhibit V (redacted version), #3 Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 12/23/2011)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151)
 [e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129)
[e-mail]
 Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603)
[e-mail]
 555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065
 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Michael T. Zeller (Cal. Bar No. 196417)
 [e-mail]
865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor
 Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 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



SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION



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,

Defendants.




Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1

NOTICE OF MOTION

2

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

3

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on December 23, 2011, Defendants Samsung

4 Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications
5 America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) will move for leave to file a motion for reconsideration
6 of this Court’s December 20, 2011 Order (“Order”). This motion will be based on this Notice of
7 Motion and Motion for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting In Part and
8 Denying In Part Samsung’s Motion to Seal, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the
9 Declaration of Derrick Robinson in Support of the Motion for Leave, the Proposed Order, and the
10 files and records in this matter and any oral argument that the Court may hear.1
11
12

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

13

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9, Defendant Samsung respectfully requests this Court

14 grant Samsung leave to file a motion for partial reconsideration of the Court’s December 20, 2011
15 Order (“Order”).

Defendant is entitled to leave to file a motion for partial reconsideration

16 because it is unclear from the Court’s Order granting in part and denying in part Samsung’s
17 Motion to File Documents Under Seal (Dkt. No. 515) whether the Court considered the fact that
18 Exhibit V of the Declaration of Mark Tung In Support of Samsung’s Notice of Lodging of
19 Materials In Support of Samsung’s Opposition to Apple’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction
20 (“Exhibit V”) reveals third-party information that is the subject of a nondisclosure agreement
21 between Samsung and Best Buy, Inc. (“Best Buy”). While the Declaration of Melissa N. Chan
22 (the “Chan Declaration”) generally discusses the contents of Exhibit V, the Declaration of Derrick
23 Robinson (the “Robinson Declaration”), submitted herewith, provides additional details about the
24 nature of the confidential information contained therein.

These Declarations provide information

25
26

1

As of the time of filing this motion, Samsung’s counsel was unable to confirm Apple's
27 opposition or non-opposition to Samsung’s motion for leave. Apple did not file an opposition to
Samsung’s original Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (Dkt. No. 456).
28
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-1SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1 demonstrating that Exhibit V is sealable pursuant to Local Rule 79-5 due to the third-party
2 confidential information that would be revealed with its disclosure.

Because the Chan and

3 Robinson Declarations satisfy the requirements of Local Rule 79-5, and because it is unclear from
4 the Court’s ruling whether it considered that the information in Exhibit V would cause harm to a
5 third-party in issuing its Order, leave to seek reconsideration of the Order is appropriate.

(See

6 L.R. 7-9.)
7

BACKGROUND

8

On December 7, 2011, Samsung filed and Administrative Motion to File Documents

9 Under Seal, supported by the Chan Declaration. (Dkt. No. 456.)

On December 20, 2011, the

10 Court granted Samsung’s motion as to Exhibit T of the Tung Declaration.

(See Dkt. No. 515.)

11 However, the Court denied Samsung’s request to file other exhibits to the Tung Declaration under
12 seal, including Exhibit V.
13
14

ARGUMENT
Local Rule 79-5(a) permits a document to be filed under seal “where [the] document, or

15 portions thereof, is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection
16 under the law.” A showing of good cause will suffice to justify sealing material attached to non17 dispositive motions. Prosurance Group, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Group, Inc., 2011 WL 704456
18 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 18, 2011) (quoting Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172,
19 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)).
20

The Chan Declaration generally describes the confidential nature of the information at

21 issue in Exhibit V.

As set forth in the Chan Declaration, Exhibit V consists of excerpts from the

22 deposition transcript of Mr. Justin Denison, Samsung’s 30(b)(6) witness.

(Chan Decl. ¶ 7.) Mr.

23 Denison’s testimony relates to confidential third-party information about the relationship between
24 Samsung and Best Buy, a nonparty to this action, and a marketing promotion involving both
25 parties.

As further described in the Robinson Declaration, Samsung and Best Buy have entered

26 into an agreement with nondisclosure provisions regarding the details of their business
27 relationship, and certain information regarding the marketing promotion is subject to those
28 nondisclosure provisions. (Robinson Decl. ¶¶ 3-4).
-2-

While the promotion itself was obviously

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1 public, the details of the origination of such promotion are not public. Samsung accordingly
2 designated it as HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY. (Id.)

Disclosure

3 of the information contained in Exhibit V could therefore harm the ongoing business relationship
4 between Samsung and Best Buy, resulting in considerable financial harm to Samsung and
5 potentially to Best Buy.
6

While the Court notes the Chan Declaration, the Court’s Order does not address the

7 confidentiality concerns described therein or the potential harm that might result to nonparties; the
8 Order states only that Exhibit V “appear[s] to contain ether public information, or do[es] no
9 contain privileged or otherwise protectable information.”

However, the Robinson Declaration

10 provides additional details regarding Exhibit V’s confidentiality, and demonstrates that Samsung
11 is committed to protecting the third-party information revealed in Exhibit V.

The Chan and

12 Robinson Declarations contain material facts which, if considered, tip the balance in favor of
13 granting Samsung’s motion to file Exhibit V under seal.

(See Civ. L.R. 7-9(b)(3).) Because it

14 is unclear whether and to what extent the Court considered the Chan Declaration and because the
15 Court did not have the additional details provided in the Robinson Declaration prior to the
16 issuance of its Order, leave to file a motion for reconsideration is appropriate.
17
18

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Samsung respectfully requests that this Court grant Samsung

19 leave to file a motion to reconsider its Order denying Samsung’s administrative motion to file
20 Exhibit V under seal.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

-3-

1 DATED: December 23, 2011
2

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

3
4
5
6
7
8

By

/s/ Victoria Maroulis
Charles K. Verhoeven
Kevin P.B. Johnson
Victoria F. Maroulis
Michael T. Zeller
Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
INC., and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

-4-