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

Filing 858

RESPONSE (re #856 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Response to Apple's Corrected Reply In Support of Rule 37(b)(2) Motion ) Apple's Opposition to Samsung's Administrative Request for Leave to File a Sur-Reply to Apple's Reply in Support of Rule 37(b)(2) Motion re Samsung's Violation of January 27, 2012 Damages Discovery Order filed byApple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 4/7/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368) ALISON M. TUCHER (CA SBN 171363) RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425) JASON R. BARTLETT (CA SBN 214530) MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105–2482 Telephone: (415) 268–7000 Facsimile: (415) 268–7522 WILLIAM F. LEE 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) WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858–6000 Facsimile: (650) 858–6100 10 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim–Defendant APPLE INC. 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 SAN JOSE DIVISION 16 17 APPLE INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, 18 19 20 21 22 v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a Korean corporation; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 23 Defendants. 24 Case No. 11–cv–01846–LHK (PSG) APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUR-REPLY TO APPLE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF RULE 37(b)(2) MOTION RE SAMSUNG’S VIOLATION OF JANUARY 27, 2012 DAMAGES DISCOVERY ORDER Date: Time: Place: Judge: April 9, 2012 10:00 a.m. Courtroom 5, 4th Floor Hon. Paul S. Grewal 25 26 27 28 APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK (PSG) sf-3130580 1 Samsung offers no explanation for waiting 18 days after Apple filed its reply, during a 2 holiday weekend less than two days before the hearing,1 to seek leave to submit a 10-page sur- 3 reply. Samsung gave no notice to Apple of its filing, and it did not confer with Apple before 4 filing it as required by Civil Local Rule 7-11. The Court should deny the requested leave. 5 Samsung inappropriately invokes Civil Local Rule 7-3(d) as a basis for its Administrative 6 Request. Rule 7-3(d) allows a party to file, “within 7 days after the reply is filed, an Objection to 7 Reply Evidence, which may not exceed 5 pages of text, stating its objections to any new 8 evidence, which may not include further argument on the motion.” Samsung’s proposed sur- 9 reply violates all of these requirements. 10 Samsung also violates Civil Local Rule 7-11, the other Rule invoked in its Administrative 11 Request. Local Rule 7-11 provides that any request for administrative relief “must be 12 accompanied . . . by either a stipulation under Civil L.R. 7-12 or by a declaration that explains 13 why a stipulation could not be obtained.” Samsung’s Administrative Request is not accompanied 14 by either a stipulation or a declaration, for good reason—Samsung did not even inform Apple of 15 its intended filing, much less seek Apple’s consent to its being filed. 16 For the foregoing reasons, Apple requests that the Court deny Samsung’s Administrative 17 Request for leave to file a sur-reply to Apple’s reply in support of its Rule 37(b)(2) Motion 18 scheduled for hearing this Monday at 10:00 a.m. 19 Dated: April 7, 2012 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 20 By: 21 22 /s/ Michael A. Jacobs Michael A. Jacobs Attorneys for Plaintiff APPLE INC. 23 24 25 26 27 1 The declaration of Mr. Kim that is attached to the response was signed on March 30 in Korea, more than a week ago. It could have been, but was not, provided to Apple prior to Mr. Sheppard’s deposition in the U.S. on March 30 or Mr. Sim’s deposition in Korea on March 31. 28 APPLE’S OPPOSITION TO SAMSUNG’S ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK (PSG) sf-3130580 1

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?