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)
 [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



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-