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 14

John Duchemin
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Ben Quarmby
Monday, November 28, 2011 3:02 PM
Haskett, Christine; Ho, Jill; David Perlson; Harvey, Leslie
Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; AppleCov; Marshall Searcy
RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Christine –
Given the time left in the case before the close of discovery, an assurance that Apple will be “reasonable” is not
sufficient and rings hollow. This is particularly true given how unreasonable the position is that Apple has taken in its
motion to strike for all the reasons we have previously outlined, and Apple has ignored. To date, Apple has refused to
produce the discovery we have asked for, and has made no firm commitment in relation to this discovery in the event its
motion to strike is denied. Thus, there is an impasse and we will proceed with a motion to compel.
Best regards,
Ben Quarmby

From: Haskett, Christine [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 5:14 PM
To: Ben Quarmby; Ho, Jill; David Perlson; Harvey, Leslie
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; AppleCov; Marshall Searcy
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Ben,
We are not planning to “foreclose” further discovery if our motion to strike is denied. As Jill
has already stated, if that happens, we will be reasonable in negotiating with you over the
proper scope and timing of further discovery. Given our position in this regard, we don’t
believe that we currently have a dispute that would warrant the filing of a motion to compel.
Christine
From: Ben Quarmby [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 10:52 AM
To: Ho, Jill; David Perlson; Harvey, Leslie
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; AppleCov; Marshall Searcy
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Jill –
Your current proposal would allow Apple to foreclose any discovery on the additional products even after denial
of its motion to strike, causing severe prejudice to Motorola. We need a commitment that Apple will produce
the documents and witnesses as outlined below in the event its motion to strike were to be denied. Otherwise,
we will need to file a motion to compel such production.
Please let us know whether Apple will reconsider by close of business today.
1

Best regards,
Ben Quarmby

From: Ho, Jill [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 1:15 PM
To: Ben Quarmby; David Perlson; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Hi Ben,
As I clarified when we spoke this morning, I said we were not currently planning to put up any 30(b)(6) witnesses
regarding the newly accused products because it is Apple's position that they are not in the case. If our motion to
strike is denied and Motorola is allowed to supplement its infringement contentions, we would be willing to
reconsider and will be reasonable about such discovery.
As for whether Apple would oppose an extension of the discovery deadline, that would depend on when the Court
issues its ruling and whether it would be reasonable to complete discovery on newly accused products by January
17. I don't think we would rule out the possibility of seeking an extension (or jointly seeking an extension with
Motorola), but without knowing what the Court's ruling will be or when it will be issued or the length of the
extension Motorola is planning to propose, I can't say whether we would oppose such a request. I would be happy
to discuss this with you further after the Court rules on our motion to strike.
Best regards,
Jill
From: Ben Quarmby [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 9:51 AM
To: Ho, Jill; David Perlson; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Jill –
I write to memorialize our phone conversation last Wednesday. You indicated that if Apple’s pending motion to
strike were to be denied by the Court, Apple would be prepared – subject to its general and specific objections –
to promptly produce the documents Motorola has requested relating to the iTunes, iPhone 4S, and iCloud
products and designate 30(b)(6) witnesses as to aspects of the noticed topics relevant to those products. Apple
also indicated it would not oppose an extension of the discovery deadline if necessary to accommodate this
discovery triggered by the Court’s ruling.
Please let me know if you disagree.
Best regards,
Ben Quarmby
From: Ho, Jill [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 2:02 PM
To: Ben Quarmby; David Perlson; '[e-mail]'
2

Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Hi Ben,
Mr. Florin has informed us that he has a hard stop at 3pm on January 13th. We are willing to start the deposition
at 8am to accommodate his schedule. Please confirm whether you would like to proceed at 8am on January 13th.
Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
Jill
From: Ben Quarmby [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 4:11 PM
To: Ho, Jill; David Perlson; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Jill –
First, thank you for proposing the deposition dates below. We are available for the January 11 deposition of Ian
Hendry as well as the January 13 deposition of Fabrice Florin. As for the deposition of Brendan Langoulant,
would you mind clarifying what you mean by “certain aspects of Topics 64, 68 and 84”?
Second, you inquired during our meet and confer about the availability of Gene Eggleston for deposition. Mr.
Eggleston is available on January 17 for a deposition to be held at Quinn Emanuel’s Chicago offices. Please let us
know whether that date works for you.
Best regards,
Ben Quarmby

From: Ho, Jill [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:25 PM
To: David Perlson; Ben Quarmby; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Depositions

Hi David/ Ben,
I write to offer the following deposition dates:
Brendan Langoulant, Apple's witness for certain aspects of Topics 64, 68, and 84 of Motorola's 30(b)(6) notice, is
available for deposition on Wednesday, December 14 at Covington's Redwood Shores offices.
In addition, Ian Hendry ('646/'116 inventor) is available for deposition on Wednesday, January 11. Fabrice Florin
('560/'509/'456 inventor) is available for deposition on Friday, January 13. Both of these depositions would be at
Weil's Redwood Shores offices.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether these dates work for your team.
3

Best regards,
Jill
From: Ho, Jill
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 10:54 AM
To: David Perlson ([e-mail]); 'Ben Quarmby'; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Discovery

David / Ben,
Please see the attached letter.
Best regards,
Jill
From: Ben Quarmby [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:14 PM
To: Ho, Jill; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Moto-Apple-SDFL; Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL External; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Apple/Motorola (FL) - Discovery

Jill, Leslie –
Please see the attached correspondence.
Best regards,
Ben Quarmby
Associate,
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10010
212-849-7277 Direct
212.849.7000 Main Office Number
212.849.7100 FAX
[e-mail]
www.quinnemanuel.com
NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This
message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not
the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in
error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.

The information contained in this email message is intended only for use of the individual or entity named above.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by email,
[e-mail], and destroy the original message. Thank you.

4