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

Filing 658

First MOTION for Leave to Supplement Its Infringement Contentions filed by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration in support, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J, #12 Exhibit K, #13 Exhibit L, #14 Proposed Order Granting Motion for Leave to Amend)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 1/25/2012) Modified text on 1/26/2012 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
EXHIBIT I Rene Unger From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Todd Briggs Friday, December 30, 2011 10:36 AM 'Selwyn, Mark'; 'Maselli, Samuel'; Victoria Maroulis; 'Kolovos, Peter' Samsung v. Apple; 'AppleMoFo@mofo.com'; 'WH Apple Samsung NDCal Service' RE: Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal.) - Correspondence re supplemental infringement contentions Mark, I just left my cell number with your secretary. You can reach me at 925.895.0664. Thanks, Todd From: Selwyn, Mark [mailto:Mark.Selwyn@wilmerhale.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 10:32 AM To: Todd Briggs; Maselli, Samuel; Victoria Maroulis; Kolovos, Peter Cc: Samsung v. Apple; AppleMoFo@mofo.com; WH Apple Samsung NDCal Service Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal.) - Correspondence re supplemental infringement contentions Todd: Please call me to discuss. I will be in the office for a few more hours today. Mark From: Todd Briggs [mailto:toddbriggs@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 10:30 AM To: Todd Briggs; Maselli, Samuel; Victoria Maroulis; Kolovos, Peter Cc: Samsung v. Apple; 'AppleMoFo@mofo.com'; WH Apple Samsung NDCal Service Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal.) - Correspondence re supplemental infringement contentions Sam and Peter, We still have not received any response from you on this. Will you please provide one today. If we don’t hear back from you, we will assume that you oppose our request and will file a motion early next week. Thanks, Todd From: Todd Briggs Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 2:34 PM To: Todd Briggs; Maselli, Samuel; Victoria Maroulis Cc: Samsung v. Apple; 'AppleMoFo@mofo.com'; WH Apple Samsung NDCal Service Subject: RE: Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal.) - Correspondence re supplemental infringement contentions Sam – We have not received a response to my December 22 letter from you or anyone else at your firm. We requested a response by December 28th. We need to know Apple’s answer by the end of this week. Please let me know if you or someone else at your firm is available to discuss this later today or tomorrow. 1 Thanks, Todd From: Todd Briggs Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:40 PM To: Maselli, Samuel; Victoria Maroulis Cc: Samsung v. Apple; 'AppleMoFo@mofo.com'; WH Apple Samsung NDCal Service Subject: Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal.) - Correspondence re supplemental infringement contentions Sam – Please see attached letter regarding supplemental infringement contentions. Todd Briggs Partner, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 650-801-5020 Direct 650.801.5000 Main Office Number 650.801.5100 FAX toddbriggs@quinnemanuel.com www.quinnemanuel.com NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. 2

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?