Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Proposed Order Denying Apple's Motion to Compel Discovery Related to Its Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims (relates to Dkt No. 643-3) by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. (Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 1/17/2012)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION
11 APPLE INC., a California corporation,
CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK-PSG
14 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity; SAMSUNG
15 ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation; SAMSUNG
16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
APPLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL
DISCOVERY RELATING TO ITS
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND
On January 10, 2012, Plaintiff Apple Inc. (“Apple”) moved for an order compelling
Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung
Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) to produce documents and things
responsive to various of Apple’s Requests for Production (Docket No. 600).
Having considered the briefs and the arguments of the parties, and the entire file in this
action, the Court hereby DENIES Apple’s motion to compel discovery relating to its affirmative
defenses and counterclaims in its entirety, as follows:
SSO Documents. Apple’s motion to compel is DENIED as overbroad, unduly
3 burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence with
4 respect to its requests for all documents related to Samsung’s participation in ETSI and/or 3GPP.
License Agreements. Apple’s motion to compel is DENIED as overbroad, unduly
6 burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence with
7 respect to its requests for all license agreements and documents reflecting license negotiations
8 (whether resulting in a contract or not) relating to patents that Samsung has declared essential to
9 the ETSI and/or 3GPP standards. Apple's motion to compel is DENIED for failure to meet and
10 confer with respect to its request for all license agreements to relevant technologies that cover only
11 patents that have not been declared essential to a standards body.
Inventor Documents. Apple's motion to compel is DENIED as overbroad, unduly
13 burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence with
14 respect to its request to compel Samsung to run additional specified term searches in Samsung's
15 inventor files.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
18 DATED: ___________, 2012
The Honorable Paul S. Grewal
United States Magistrate Judge
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?