Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 225

MOTION to Compel Responses to Interrogatories Nos. 7 and 12 Regarding Products Embodying Motorola's Asserted Patents and Accompanying Memorandum of Law in Support by Apple, Inc.. Responses due by 2/16/2012 (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Elena Dimuzio, # 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, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Text of Proposed Order)(Pace, Christopher)

EXHIBIT 1

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER

INTERROGATORY NO. 12:
Separately for each asserted claim of each of the Motorola Mobility Patents-in-Suit,
identify all devices manufactured, sold, or used by You or any non-party to this Action that You
believe has embodied, practiced, fallen within the scope of, used, or been marked with the
Motorola Mobility Patents-in-Suit.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:
Mobility incorporates its Preliminary Statement and General Objections set forth above
as though set forth fully herein. Mobility objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks to
elicit information subject to and protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney workproduct doctrine, the joint defense privilege, the common interest doctrine, and/or any other
applicable privilege or immunity. Mobility further objects to this interrogatory to the extent it
calls for a legal conclusion or presents a question of law. Mobility further objects to this
interrogatory to the extent it calls for information regarding the devices of "any non-party to this

8

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
action." This request seeks information and/or documents that are outside of Mobility’s
possession, custody or control.
Mobility further objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for Mobility's
contentions or expert opinion regarding which devices have "embodied, practiced, fallen within
the scope of, used, or been marked with the Motorola Mobility Patents-in-Suit." This request is
premature in light of the Court's February 2, 2011 Scheduling Order directing the parties to
provide opening expert reports on November 4, 2011. Mobility is still investigating the claims
and defenses at issue in this case. Mobility will provide responses regarding its contentions on
the timeframe set by the Court, after it has had an opportunity to seek discovery regarding its
contentions.
Subject to and without waiving its General Objections and the foregoing specific
objections, Mobility states that it has accused third party products of infringing one or more
claims of the following patents:
U.S. Patent No. 5,958,006: BlackBerry Pearl 8100, 8110, 8120, 8130, 8220, 8230;
BlackBerry Storm 9500, 9530; BlackBerry Bold 9000; BlackBerry Curve 8900, 8300, 8310,
8320, 8330, 8350i; BlackBerry 8800, 8820, 8830.
U.S. Patent No. 6,101,531: BlackBerry Enterprise Solution including the BlackBerry
Enterprise Server.
Mobility has not yet completed its discovery and investigation of the facts relating to this
interrogatory. Mobility will supplement this response at the appropriate time and as its
investigation continues, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e) and the
schedule ordered by the Court.

9

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
Separately identify each product manufactured, sold, or used by You or any non-party to
this Action that has been marked with any of the Motorola Mobility Patents-in-Suit, including a
detailed description of: (i) the dates on which said products were offered for sale and (ii) the
dates on which said products were marked.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
Mobility incorporates its Preliminary Statement and General Objections set forth above
as though set forth fully herein. Mobility objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks to
elicit information subject to and protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney workproduct doctrine, the joint defense privilege, the common interest doctrine, and/or any other
applicable privilege or immunity. Mobility further objects to this interrogatory to the extent it
calls for a legal conclusion or presents a question of law. Additionally, Mobility objects to the
extent that this interrogatory seeks information and/or documents that are outside of Mobility’s
possession, custody or control, including information regarding products manufactured, sold, or
used by non-parties to this Action.
To the extent this interrogatory calls for Mobility's contentions or expert testimony or
opinion, Mobility objects that this interrogatory is premature in light of the Court's February 2,
2011 Scheduling Order directing the parties to submit opening expert reports on November 4,
2011. Mobility is still investigating the claims and defenses at issue in this case. Mobility will
provide responses regarding its contentions on the timeframe set by the Court, after it has had an
opportunity to seek discovery regarding its contentions.

10

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Mobility
responds that, upon information and belief, Mobility is not currently aware of any product
marked with any of the Mobility Patents-in-Suit.
Mobility has not yet completed its discovery and investigation of the facts relating to this
interrogatory. Mobility will supplement this response at the appropriate time and as its
investigation continues, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e) and the
schedule ordered by the Court.

11

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 8, 2011, I served the foregoing document via
electronic mail on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List.

/s/ Mark D. Baker
Mark D. Baker

15