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

Filing 774

MOTION Leave to File Sur-Reply filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.(a New York corporation), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC(a Delaware limited liability company). Motion Hearing set for 3/6/2012 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal. Responses due by 3/20/2012. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Grating Leave to FIle Sur-Reply, #2 Supplement Sur-Reply In Support of Samsung's Opposition to Apple's Motion to Compel, #3 Declaration of Joby Martin In Support of Samsung's Sur-Reply, #4 Declaration of Melissa Dalziel In Support of Samsung's Sur-Reply)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 3/6/2012)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)
 [e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Kevin P.B. Johnson (Bar No. 177129)
[e-mail]
 Victoria F. Maroulis (Bar No. 202603)
[e-mail]
th
 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5 Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139
 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

 Michael T. Zeller (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 (PSG)



DECLARATION OF JOBY MARTIN IN
SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S SUR-REPLY
IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO
APPLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL



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,

Defendant.


Date:
Time:
Place:
Judge:

March 6, 2012
10:00 a.m.
Courtroom 5, 4th Floor
Hon. Paul S. Grewal


02198.51855/4638091.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S SUR-REPLY

1

I, Joby Martin, declare as follows:



1.

I am an associate in the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP,

 counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung
 Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”). I submit this declaration in
 support of Samsung’s Sur-Reply In Support of Its Opposition to Apple's Motion to Compel
 Timely Production of Foreign-Language and Other Documents (“Samsung’s Sur-Reply”). I
 have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration, except as otherwise noted, and,
 if called upon as a witness, I could and would testify to such facts under oath.


2.

On February 23, 2012, more than a week after Samsung filed its Opposition to

 Apple's Motion to Compel, Apple sent a letter announcing, for the first time, its desire to reopen
 depositions in instances of allegedly late-produced custodial documents. Apple also announced,
 again for the first time, that it would seek an order, via its reply brief, compelling Samsung to
 reopen depositions. Counsel for Samsung received this letter at 2:22 P.M. According to the
 ECF Notice I received by email in connection with Docket No. 736, Apple filed its Reply brief
 at 12:04 A.M. on February 24, 2012.


3.

Apple did not inform Samsung of its intent to file a supplemental declaration in

 support of its Motion to Compel before seeking leave to file such a declaration on March 4,
 2012.


4.

Lead counsel met and conferred three separate times after Apple filed its Motion

 to Compel—February 6, February 14, and February 15. I attended each meeting. Apple never
 raised the issue of reopening depositions, or did anything to suggest that it would alter the relief
 sought in its Motion to Compel.


5.

In correspondence and at the parties January 16, 2012 lead counsel meet and

 confer, Samsung made clear its desire to negotiate a global solution that would resolve the
 prejudice to both parties caused by the other’s late productions. Apple refused to discuss any
 compromise arrangements until February 23, 2012, the same day it filed its Reply.


6.

None of the patents asserted by Apple in the '796 ITC Investigation are asserted

 in this case.
02198.51855/4638091.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-1MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S SUR-REPLY

1

7.

I am informed and believe that since Samsung filed its Opposition to Apple's

2 Motion to Compel Timely Production of Foreign-Language and Other Documents in Advance of
3 Related Depositions on February 15, 2012, Samsung has regularly produced documents three or
4 more days in advance of each deposition, as reflected in the chart below:1
5
Samsung Witness

Deposition Date

6

Most Recent
Production Date(s)

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Oh Chae Kwon*++
Hye Jung Lee*++
Jong Dae Park*
Dong Hoon Chang*
Joonil Choi
Joonho Park
Hyun Ku Woo*
Seung Yun Lee*
Mincehol Schin+^++
SeungKyu Lee*++
Eun Mi Cha
Seunghun Yoo+
Hyoung Shin Park
Dong Sub Kim
Sung Sik Lee
Daewoon Myeong++
Sanggeun Lee
HeonSeok Lee
Seogguen Kim
Seong Ho Choi
DeongSeok Ryu
Dooju Byun
Tim Benner
JunWon Lee
Tim Sheppard
Corey Kerstetter++
Sang Hung
Justin Denison

3/8
3/8
3/8
3/7
3/8
3/7
3/6
3/7
3/2
3/8 (cancelled)
3/6 (cancelled)
2/28
2/29
2/28
3/1
2/29
2/24
2/29
2/29
2/19
2/25
1/1
2/19
2/29
1/19
2/27
2/24
1/20

3/5
3/4
3/3
3/2
3/2
3/2
3/1
3/4
3/1
2/29
2/29
2/27
2/24
2/23
2/22
2/21
2/20
2/19
2/16
2/14
2/29
2/17
2/22
3/5
2/24
2/29
3/8
2/25

Number of Days
Samsung’s
Production Preceded
the Deposition
(0-23 = 0 days
24-47 hours = 1 day
etc.)
2
2.8
4.8
3.7
5.2
4.5
3.8
1.8
7.5
7.8
4.9
5.8
7.1
7.0
2.9
9.1
12
4.1
3.5
46
2.8
4.8
4.5
1.8
12
4.5

24
25
1
* Samsung’s production delayed by at least 1 day due to Apple's complaint regarding a
26 small amount of distorted Korean text, requiring adjustments in production process
+ vendor error
27
^ technical difficulties
++ delay due to size of production
28
02198.51855/4638091.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-2MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S SUR-REPLY

1

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

2 foregoing is true and correct.
3

Executed on March 6, 2012, at San Francisco, California.

4
5

/s/ Joby Martin
Joby Martin

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4638091.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-3MARTIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SAMSUNG’S SUR-REPLY