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).
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?