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

Filing 730

Declaration of Marc J. Pernick in Support of #729 Opposition/Response to Motion, CORRECTION OF DOCKET #728 filed byApple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13)(Related document(s) #729 ) (Hung, Richard) (Filed on 2/13/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) hmcelhinny@mofo.com MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) mjacobs@mofo.com JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368) jtaylor@mofo.com ALISON M. TUCHER (CA SBN 171363) atucher@mofo.com JASON BARTLETT (CA SBN 197425) rhung@mofo.com JASON R. BARTLETT (CA SBN 214530) jasonbartlett@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 10 WILLIAM F. LEE william.lee@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 526-6000 Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 15 APPLE INC., a California corporation, Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. 18 19 20 21 22 23 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. DECLARATION OF MARC J. PERNICK IN SUPPORT OF APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO PERMIT SAMSUNG’S EXPERT SAMUEL LUCENTE TO REVIEW MATERIALS DESIGNATED UNDER THE PROTECTIVE ORDER Date: Time: Place: Judge: March 6, 2012 10:00 a.m. Courtroom 5, 4th Floor Hon. Paul S. Grewal 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF M. PERNICK ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION RE LUCENTE CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK 1 I, Marc J. Pernick, do hereby declare as follows: 2 1. I am a partner at the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP, attorneys of record in 3 this action for Apple Inc. (“Apple”). I submit this declaration in support of Apple’s Opposition to 4 Samsung’s Motion to Permit Samsung’s Expert Samuel Lucente to Review Materials Designated 5 Under the Protective Order. Unless otherwise indicated, I have personal knowledge of the 6 matters set forth below. If called as a witness, I could and would testify competently as follows. 7 2. To date, Defendants have disclosed approximately twenty experts to Apple. Apple 8 has asserted objections under the protective order in place in this case to only three of those 9 experts. 10 11 3. counsel for Samsung and Apple between December 27, 2011 and January 8, 2012. 12 13 4. Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of a page from the Industrial Designers Society of America (IDSA) website (http://idsa.org/sam-lucente). 14 15 Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of email correspondence between 5. Attached as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of email correspondence between counsel for Samsung and Apple between December 13 and December 20, 2011. 16 6. Attached as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of a notification, obtained from the 17 official website of the European Patent Office, dated February 2, 2001, concerning entry of 18 international patent application number PCT/US00/10073 into proceedings before the European 19 Patent Office as European patent application no. 00928177.5. 20 7. Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of international patent application 21 number PCT/US00/10073, including European Patent Office publication EP 1 224 554 A0 22 noticing publication of the application by the World Intellectual Property Organisation under the 23 publication number WO 01/06375, obtained from the official website of the European Patent 24 Office. 25 26 27 28 8. Attached as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Rachel Kassabian to Mia Mazza, dated January 25, 2012. 9. Attached as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of a Hoover’s Quick Report on Lucente Design, processed on January 31, 2012. 1 DECLARATION OF M. PERNICK ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION RE LUCENTE CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 10. Attached as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy of a Dun & Bradstreet Comprehensive Report on Lucente Design, last updated on January 14, 2012. 11. Attached as Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Marc Pernick to Rachel Kassabian, dated February 5, 2012. 12. Attached as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Mia Mazza to Melissa Chan, dated December 27, 2011. 13. Attached as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Marc Pernick to Rachel Kassabian, dated January 27, 2012. 14. Attached as Exhibit 12 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Marc Pernick to Rachel Kassabian, dated January 30, 2012. 15. Attached as Exhibit 13 is a true and correct copy of a letter from Albert P. Bedecarré to Mia Mazza, dated February 12, 2012. 13 I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 14 Executed on February 13, 2012 at Palo Alto, California. 15 16 17 /s/ Marc J. Pernick Marc J. Pernick 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 DECLARATION OF M. PERNICK ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION RE LUCENTE CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK 1 ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE 2 I, Richard S.J. Hung, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 3 Declaration. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Marc J. Pernick has 4 concurred in this filing. 5 Dated: February 13, 2012 /s/ Richard S.J. Hung Richard S.J. Hung 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 DECLARATION OF M. PERNICK ISO APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S MOTION RE LUCENTE CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK

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?