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

Filing 692

MOTION to Shorten Time for Briefing and Hearing on Samsung's Motion to Permit Samsung's Expert Samuel Lucente to Review Materials Designated Under the Protective Order (Dkt No. 691) filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Brett Arnold, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 1/31/2012)

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 TO
SHORTEN TIME FOR BRIEFING AND
HEARING



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.




02198.51855/4577533.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

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”) in this action. Unless otherwise
5 indicated, I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and, if called upon as
6 a witness, I could and would testify as follows.
7

2.

The relief requested in Samsung's Motion to Shorten Time for Briefing and

8 Hearing Its Motion to Permit Samuel Lucente to Review Materials Designated Under the
9 Protective Order is necessary to allow Samsung to begin disclosing Apple's highly confidential
10 documents and things to Mr. Lucente well in advance of the March 22, 2012 deadline for initial
11 expert reports.
12

3.

Counsel for Apple agreed to a shortened briefing and hearing schedule where

13 Apple's opposition brief would be due on Friday, February 3, 2012, and the motion would be
14 heard by the Court on Tuesday, February 7, 2012.

Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct

15 copy of a January 30, 2012 letter from counsel for Apple to counsel for Samsung confirming this
16 schedule at the end of page 2.
17

4.

The only portion of the shortened schedule not agreed to by Apple was Samsung's

18 request to file a reply brief.

Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of a January 30,

19 2012 email exchange between counsel for Samsung and counsel for Apple.

In the exchange,

20 counsel for Samsung indicated that Samsung had yet to learn what Apple's concerns were with
21 Mr. Lucente's patent ownership and had not received any proposal from Apple to address those
22 concerns.

In light of this, counsel for Samsung requested the chance to file a short reply on

23 Monday morning, to address any concerns Apple includes in its opposition.

Counsel for Apple

24 denied this request.
25

5.

Pursuant to L.R. 6-3(a)(5), previous time modifications in the case, whether by

26 stipulation or Court order, include the following:
27
28
02198.51855/4577533.1

A.

On April 26, 2011, the Court granted Apple’s motion to shorten time for
briefing and hearing on its motion to expedite discovery. (Dkt No. 26.)
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-2ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

1

B.

On May 9, 2011, Apple and Samsung stipulated and agreed that the time for

2

Samsung to serve responsive pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(a) shall be 75

3

days after April 21, 2011. On May 10, 2011, the Court signed the

4

Stipulation and Order regarding an extension of time for Samsung to serve

5

responsive pleadings. (Dkt No. 40.)

6

C.

On June 1, 2011, the Court granted in part Samsung’s request to shorten

7

time for hearing and briefing on Samsung’s Motion to Compel Reciprocal

8

Expedited Discovery.

9

D.

(Dkt No. 59.)

On July 18, 2011 the Court ordered a briefing schedule related to expedited

10

discovery and Apple’s motion for a preliminary injunction, setting dates

11

from July 2011 through the October 13, 2011 hearing on Apple’s Motion

12

for Preliminary Injunction. (Dkt No. 115.)

13

E.

On July 21, 2011, the Court granted the parties’ stipulation to extend the

14

time for briefing Samsung’s Motion to Disqualify Counsel Bridges &

15

Mavrakakis, LLP.

16

F.

(Dkt No. 125.)

On September 1, 2011 the Court granted Samsung’s stipulated motion to

17

expedite briefing on Samsung’s Motion to Compel Apple to Produce

18

Documents and Things.

19

G.

(Dkt No. 199)

On September 6, 2011 the Court granted Apple’s stipulated motion to

20

extend time for Apple to respond to Samsung’s Motion to Exclude the

21

Ordinary Observer Opinions of Apple Expert Cooper Woodring.

22

210.)

23

H.

24
25
26

(Dkt No.

On September 20, 2011, the Court granted Samsung’s unopposed motion to
change the hearing date on its motion to dismiss. (Dkt No. 244.)

I.

On September 23, 2011, the Court granted Apple’s motion to shorten time
to expedite briefing on Apple’s motion to compel. (Dkt No. 255.)

27
28
02198.51855/4577533.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

-3-

1

J.

On October 3, 2011, the Court granted-in-part Samsung’s motion to shorten

2

the briefing and hearing schedule on Samsung’s motion to compel.

3

No. 287.)

4

K.

(Dkt

On October 27, 2011, the Court granted Apple’s motion to shorten time for

5

the briefing and hearing schedule for its motion for a protective order.

6

(Dkt No. 332.)

7

L.

On October 31, 2011, the Court granted Samsung’s motion to shorten the

8

briefing and hearing schedule on Samsung’s motion to compel.

9

350.)

10

M.

On December 9, 2011, the Court granted Apple’s motion to shorten time for
briefing and hearing on Apple’s motion to compel.

11
12

N.

(Dkt No.

(Dkt No. 477.)

On December 13, 2011, the Court granted Samsung’s motion to shorten

13

time for briefing and hearing on Samsung’s motion to compel.

14

499).

15

O.

(Dkt. No.

On December 22, 2011, the Court granted Apple’s motion to shorten time
for briefing and hearing on Apple’s motion to strike. (Dkt. No. 538).

16
17

P.

On December 30, 2011, the Court granted Samsung’s motion to shorten
time for briefing on Samsung’s motion to extend time. (Dkt No. 566.)

18
19

Q.

On January 4, 2012, the Court granted the parties’ stipulated request to

20

enlarge the time for Samsung to file objections to the Court’s Order at

21

docket number 535. (Dkt No. 571.)

22

R.

On January 11, 2012, the Court granted the parties’ stipulated request to

23

shorten the time for briefing and hearing the parties’ discovery motions.

24

(Dkt No. 610.)

25

S.

26

On January 30, 2012, the Court granted in part Apple's request shorten the
briefing and hearing schedule on its motion to compel. (Dkt No. 688.)

27

6.

28

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-4-

02198.51855/4577533.1

The present request will not affect any other deadlines in this case.

ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

1 Redwood Shores, California on January 30, 2012.
2
3

/s/ Brett Arnold

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4577533.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

-5-

1
2

GENERAL ORDER ATTESTATION
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
6

/s/ Victoria Maroulis

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4577533.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
ARNOLD DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME

-6-