Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
606
EXHIBITS re #602 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal re Samsung's January 10, 2012 Filings Exhibit 3 - [Proposed] Public Redacted Version of Samsung's Motion for Clarification filed bySamsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Exhibit A-J, #3 Exhibit K, #4 Exhibit L, #5 Proposed Order)(Related document(s) #602 ) (Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 1/11/2012)
1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151)
charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 875-6600
Facsimile: (415) 875-6700
Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129)
kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com
Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603)
victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com
555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065
Telephone: (650) 801-5000
Facsimile: (650) 801-5100
Michael T. Zeller (Cal. Bar No. 196417)
michaelzeller@quinnemanuel.com
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 BRETT ARNOLD IN
SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION
FOR CLARIFICATION REGARDING
THE COURT’S DECEMBER 22, 2011
ORDER (DKT NO. 535)
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.
Date: January 18, 2012
Time: 2:00 pm
Place: Courtroom 5, 4th Floor
Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal
[PROPOSED] PUBLIC REDACTED
VERSION
02198.51855/4543853.1
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
1
I, Brett Arnold, declare:
2
1. I am an associate 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 have personal knowledge of
5 the facts set forth in this declaration and, if called upon as a witness, I could and would testify as
6 follows.
7
2. On September 20, 2011, during preliminary injunction discovery, counsel for the
8 parties conducted a meet and confer in which Samsung offered a compromise that would allow
9 Mr. Sherman to see CAD files, inventor notebooks, the deposition transcript of Christopher
10 Stringer (who was the only design inventor to have been deposed by that time), and Apple's
11 presentations showing that certain design features are functional.
Apple rejected this
12 compromise.
13
3. On January 5, 2012, lead trial counsel met and conferred.
I am informed that at
14 the meeting, counsel for Samsung indicated that it would like to show Mr. Sherman several
15 additional categories of design documents.
Counsel for Apple indicated that it would consider
16 the categories that Samsung would provide.
On January 10, 2012, counsel for Apple indicated
17 without explanation that Apple would limit Mr. Sherman's access to the categories identified in
18 Magistrate Judge Grewal's order.
I immediately inquired as to Apple's reasons for this decision.
19 As of the time of filing, counsel for Apple had not responded.
20
4. On January 5, 2012, Apple stated in a letter that it had "thousands" of models and
21 parts relating to its products that it would make available for inspection.
22
5. On December 24, 2011, Apple confirmed in a letter from its counsel to counsel for
23 Samsung that it was running a number of basic design search terms through its designers' emails
24 and files, and was beginning to produce the results on a rolling basis.
By agreement between the
25 parties, these documents were due to be produced prior to the depositions of Apple's designers
26 back in October 2011. Even now, the parties continue to negotiate over the terms and delimiters
27 Apple is using on many of these design search terms.
28
02198.51855/4543853.1
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in
25 Redwood Shores, California on January 10, 2012.
26
27
/s/ Brett Arnold
28
02198.51855/4543853.1
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
-3-
GENERAL ORDER ATTESTATION
1
2
I, Victoria Maroulis, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file the
3 foregoing document.
I hereby attest pursuant to General Order 45.X.B. that concurrence in the
4 electronic filing of this document has been obtained from Brett Arnold.
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
02198.51855/4543853.1
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
-4-
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?