Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 185

RESPONSE in Opposition re 178 MOTION to Strike Motorola's Supplemental Infringement Contentions filed by Motorola Mobility, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14)(Giuliano, Douglas)

EXHIBIT 9

quinn emanuel

trial lawyers | los angeles

865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017 | TEL: [phone]

FAX:

[phone]

August 17, 2011
VIA E-MAIL
Christine Haskett, Esq.
Covington & Burling LLP
One Front Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5356
Re:

Jill Ho, Esq.
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

Motorola et al. v. Apple

Dear Christine and Jill:
I write concerning deficiencies in Apple's production in the S.D. Florida action. On December
29, 2010, Motorola served Apple with 88 Requests for Production.1 On January 31, 2011, Apple
agreed to produce "responsive, non-privileged documents" to over 80 of those Requests.2 I have
personally reviewed Apple's entire production, and, as I’m sure you are well aware, Apple has
failed to produce the vast majority of the documents that it agreed to produce.
In response to Motorola's Requests for Production in the S.D. Florida action, Apple has produced
a mere 1,148 documents. These documents are primarily composed of the patents at issue,
portions of the prosecution histories of those patents, and publicly available information, such as
prior art references, that Apple has relied upon in its infringement and invalidity contentions. It
therefore appears that Apple has thus far ignored the vast majority of the Requests.

1

See Motorola Mobility, Inc. and Motorola, Inc.'s First Set of Requests for Production
to Apple Inc., dated December 29, 2010.
2

See Apple's Objection and Responses to Motorola Mobility and Motorola's First Set of
Requests for Production, dated January 31, 2011.
quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp
NEW YORK | 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10010 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
SAN FRANCISCO | 50 California Street, 22nd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
SILICON VALLEY | 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 560, Redwood Shores, CA 94065 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
CHICAGO | 250 South Wacker Drive, Suite 230, Chicago, IL 60606 | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
LONDON | 16 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7EG United Kingdom | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]
TOKYO | Akasaka Twin Tower Main Bldg., 6th Fl., 17-22 Akasaka 2-Chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107-0052 Japan | TEL [phone] FAX [phone]

Moreover, Apple's production is noticeably lacking in contemporaneous documents and
communications. In fact, Apple's entire production does not include any emails or other
contemporaneous correspondence between Apple employees. Expert reports are due soon,
discovery is set to end in mere months, and Apple still has not produced a single email in
response to Motorola's Requests in this action.
Finally, Apple currently refuses to produce documents responsive to Request Nos. 1, 27, 55, 63,
68, 74, and 81. Please identify your availability to meet and confer on these issues on Monday,
August 22, 2011. I am available at any time.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Matthew O. Korhonen
Matthew O. Korhonen

2